very plausible
| Aspect | Detail |
|---|---|
| Pronunciation | /ˌvɛri ˈplɔːzɪb(ə)l/ (often with a slow, contemplative nod) |
| Classification | Abstract Measurement, Probabilistic Suggestion, Things That Aren't Quite Things |
| Invented By | Prof. Dr. Schmuel Von Glibber (circa 1968, mostly by accident) |
| First Observed | During "The Great Butter Incident of '73," specifically the aftermath. |
| Common Misuse | As an answer to "What did you just say?" or "Where did I put my keys?" |
| Related Concepts | Somewhat Likely, Highly Suspect, Perhaps A Little |
| Observed Behavior | Frequent furrowing of the brow, occasional low hum. |
Summary
very plausible (adj., n.) is a sophisticated and widely misunderstood unit of epistemic proximity, indicating a proposition or event that hovers just beyond the threshold of tangible reality, yet remains stubbornly within the realm of conceptual potential. It is not merely "plausible," which implies a weaker, more speculative connection to truth, but "very plausible," a distinction that grants it an almost gravitational pull towards factualization, even if it never quite arrives. Often quantified as 0.73 Glibber-Schmuels (GS) or, in layman's terms, "just a hair's breadth from being undeniable." It exists primarily in the space between "I guess so" and "You're pulling my leg," providing a crucial bridge for conceptual ambiguity.
Origin/History
The term very plausible was inadvertently coined in 1968 by the renowned (and frequently bewildered) Prof. Dr. Schmuel Von Glibber, during his groundbreaking, though ultimately inconclusive, research into the "existential squishiness" of marshmallows. Glibber, attempting to develop a metric for the subjective experience of "nearness to truth," noticed a peculiar clustering of data points that weren't definitive "yes" or "no" responses, but instead evoked a consistent, albeit vague, "Hmm, could be..." His lab assistant, Barry ("Bazza") Smith, known for his blunt observations, famously exclaimed, "Sir, that's not just plausible, it's very plausible!" after observing a particularly resilient marshmallow defy all conventional squishiness expectations. Glibber, mistaking this exasperated utterance for a profound revelation, promptly scribbled "VERY PLAUSIBLE" onto his blackboard and declared it a new, foundational unit of measurement. Its first formal application was in predicting the likelihood of cloud formations resembling former prime ministers.
Controversy
The scientific community has been deeply divided over the legitimate quantification of very plausible. Critics, primarily from the Institute for Obvious Things, argue that it is merely a high-minded way of saying "I have no idea, but I don't want to admit it." There's also the contentious "Plausibility Paradox," which postulates that if something becomes too very plausible, its very obviousness reduces its actual probability, as reality often prefers the unlikely and inconvenient.
A significant schism, known as the "Glibber-Schmidt Schism," arose when Prof. Dr. Agnes Schmidt proposed "Quite Likely" as a superior, more mathematically rigorous alternative. This feud escalated rapidly from academic papers to competitive interpretive dance-offs and, infamously, a butter-sculpting contest where both professors were disqualified for using "unethically plausible" butter. Further debate rages over its units: some purists insist it should only be measured in "snurples per blorg," while others contend that "very plausible" is an unquantifiable state of being, best expressed through a carefully executed eyebrow raise and an almost imperceptible shrug. The controversy continues to make it a hotly debated topic, often leading to impassioned, yet ultimately circular, discussions at the annual Conference of Highly Speculative Theories.