---

Proof paradoxes refer to situations in which statistical evidence indicates that a suspect is the perpetrator, yet a conviction based solely on this evidence appears counterintuitive. The prevailing approach to addressing proof paradoxes involves establishing a criterion for distinguishing naked statistical evidence from other type of evidence. Smith introduces normic support as a criterion for the aforementioned distinction. Conversely, Di Bello proposes a modified version of normic support, arguing that the absence of access to undercutting defeaters in naked statistical evidence distinguishes it from other forms of evidence. In this research, we argue, in line with Pollock's perspective, that undercutting defeaters can still be accessed in the context of naked statistical evidence. Furthermore, by focusing on an example of proof paradoxes and drawing on Pollock's arguments-illustrated quantitatively by the base rate fallacy-we demonstrate the effectiveness of undercutting defeaters. Consequently, Di Bello's argument appears to be questionable.

---

Resistance literature, a type of political literature that comes with the popular resistance against tyranny and aggression description, as elemental efficient, pays Bydargry and justice. Analyzing the different aspects of this type of literature, the development of research in the field, particularly since the Islamic Revolution was on.In the field of literature, lasting until the end of 1390 more than 400 original research that the quality and quantity of resistance literature, and not marginal issues that have been detected, but despite little growth management, there are obstacles in the way of researching this area.In this study, the research deviations stability in the pathology literature and removing barriers, attempts to answer this question is that:
Which management deviations ranging from fallacy and confiscation of literature in the field of sustainability have been there? The distortions of what literary trends or challenges in this area have created a false?have created a false?