The juxtaposition does more than establish that opinions differ. It exposes a disagreement about which consequence should govern judgment: pressing on, avoiding rashness or keeping men alive. The paradoxical remark complicates the label without establishing what would otherwise have happened.
The useful distinction is between opportunity, possession, observed behavior and a later record. Those are different kinds of support; assembling them does not automatically settle the disputed state during the fight. Connell’s retained uncertainty matters more than the number of witnesses listed.
Testing the incident’s basic compatibility with the subject’s other writing comes before relying on it as evidence of personality. The inconsistency weakens the anecdote’s explanatory burden without establishing either a diagnosis or a complete replacement account of the hunt.
Reviewed examples have a source-linked editorial interpretation. Detected candidates are exact passages or structures retrieved by an explicit rule and still need interpretation. Neither label establishes a cause of bestseller longevity. No missing text is counted as a negative example.
