+A conventional human scientist studying an account of such reasoning might protest, "You're jumping to conclusions! There's _no way_ you can justify confidence in that hypothesis with so little data!" Such epistemological disputes are not easy to ajudicate, but in the end, one cannot argue with success: the extent to which our scientist would be justified in accusing our alien reasoner of jumping to conclusions must be the extent to which we expect those conclusions to be disproven later.
+
+----
+
+Suppose our alien reasoner were to be informed of the fact that, among humans, some fraction of males elect to undergo medical interventions to resememble females, and aspire to be perceived as females socially. Suppose our alien reasoner were asked to hypothesize about the cause of such behavior.
+
+
+OUTLINE OF POINTS TO HIT—
+
+ * probability theory only cares about theories that predict the data
+ * don't care about predictions vs. retrodictions
+ * don't care about "jumping to conclusions" if those conclusions later turn
+ out to be correct (if the reasoning process _were_ merely jumping to
+ conclusions, then they _wouldn't_ be correct (with overwhelming
+ probability))
+ * suppose you asked aliens to explain why some humans males trans
+ * obvious hypothesis: they're really psychologically feminine due to brain intersex
+ * suppose you further said that some subset of MtTs doesn't fit this profile; what would be the next guess?
+ * Something to do with males are usually obsessed with female bodies maybe??