The assassination as viewed through the eyes of this epistemology

STEP 1: Ask a question or pose a problem.

   Was JFK killed by a conspiracy?

STEP 2: List all possible answers, no matter how wild or crazy, no matter how bizarre or biased (comprehensive).

   1. Yes
 2. No

STEP 3: Assemble all relevant evidence (comprehensive again)

STEP 4: Divide the evidence into strong and weak; proceed with only strong, direct evidence. (Start with what you’re sure of—very important.)

   • At least two shots were fired.
• JFK was killed by two bullets, from behind.

• JBC was wounded by at least one bullet, from behind.
• All traceable fragments came from Oswald’s rifle.
• Oswald was killed two days later by Jack Ruby.
• No strong evidence for conspiracy has emerged in 35 years.

 

STEP 5: List all possible answers, however unlikely, consistent with the strong, direct evidence.

   1. Yes, he was killed by a conspiracy.
 2. No, he was killed by a lone assailant.

STEP 6: Choose the simplest answer consistent with all the facts (Occam’s razor).

     Killed by lone assailant.

STEP 7: Test this answer rigorously against its consequences (predictions) or against new evidence gathered explicitly for the purpose.

     Answer survives (is retained).

STEP 8: In the meantime, continue testing the answer regularly and vigorously. Be your own harshest critic.

     Still survives (retained).

SUMMARY: Lone-assailant hypothesis not proven but still the simplest consistent with all the strong, direct evidence.

Back to Epistemology