 Hook might respond as follows. How do we test our intuitions about the validity of an inference? The direct way is to imagine that we know for sure that the premise is true, and to consider what we would then think about the conclusion. Now when we know for sure that \({\sim}A\), we have no use for thoughts beginning “If \(A\), …”. When you know for sure that Harry didn’t do it, you don’t go in for “If Harry did it …” thoughts or remarks. In this circumstance conditionals have no role to play, and we have no practice in assessing them. The direct intuitive test is, therefore, silent on whether “If \(A, B\)” follows from \({\sim}A\). If our smoothest, simplest, generally satisfactory theory has the consequence that it does follow, perhaps we should learn to live with that consequence.