4 ms·
You're being prescriptive that we always treat "prove" as if it has the meaning as we use it in math and logic. That's not how language works. Words have differ
by fasterik 4y ago
You're being prescriptive that we always treat "prove" as if it has the meaning as we use it in math and logic. That's not how language works. Words have different meanings in different contexts.
Top definition of "prove" according to Google: "demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument." According to that definition, it seems completely reasonable to me to say that science can prove things.
- muaytimbo 4y agoI think colloquially, lay people may not know the ontological origins of the word but when they use the word "proof" they mean it as some indisputable fact. At least most people I know use it in that manner.
- fasterik 4y agoEvidence? The dictionary disagrees with you. Dictionaries are compiled from the ways that people actually use language in the real world. Also, the etymology of "prove" has nothing to do with indisputable facts: Middle English: from Old French prover, from Latin probare ‘test, approve, demonstrate’, from probus ‘good’. Edit: I feel I was being a bit forceful with my replies here. You airing your pet peeve triggered my pet peeve with linguistic prescriptivism. Sorry about that.