Oh damn, still in this dream.

I recognise this: however in terms of "usefulness" I think the distinction is a good one. I mean, I have read Popper, Hume, et al, but when it comes to practical application of the "best possible evidence" notwithstanding falsifiability, Wittgenstein's Poker, and the nature of knowledge and the scientific requirement for workable hypotheses rather than strict logical proof, I think it remarkably elegant.