Suppose that we have a bunch of premises which are unproven but lead to a valid conclusion, how much of a leap of faith it is to assert that the premises can now be seen as valid?
I have said "a bunch of" so as to eliminate the coincidence effect. This on its own leads me to another question, is it possible in this case to disregard the possibility of coincidence?
In general, and if my first question has a positive answer, would an extensive number of premises nullify the coincidence possibility?
And if so, what would be considered as an extensive number?