 In the case of conflicting prima facie reasons, Pollock rejects the principle of specificity, a widely accepted principle according to which the defeasible rule with the more specific antecedent takes priority over conflicting rules with less specific antecedents. Pollock does, however, accept a special case of specificity in the area of statistical syllogisms with projectible properties. (Pollock 1995, 64–66) So, if I know that most \(A\)s are \(B\)s, and the most \(AC\)s are not \(B\)s, then I should, upon learning that individual \(b\) is both \(A\) and \(C\), give priority to the \(AC\) generalization over the \(A\) generalization (concluding that \(b\) is not a \(B)\).