3 ms·
Absence of evidence is most is definitely evidence of absence, even if it isn't absolute proof. Or rather, failing to find evidence that a hypothesis would pred
by maxbond 3y ago
Absence of evidence is most is definitely evidence of absence, even if it isn't absolute proof. Or rather, failing to find evidence that a hypothesis would predict to exist is evidence that the hypothesis is incorrect. You can't absolutely prove a negative, but every time you fail to substantiate evidence for the positive counter claim, your certainty of the negative claim should asymptotically approach 1. And eventually you should be satisfied with the body of evidence and move on to ask different questions.
For that matter, I suppose you can't absolutely prove a positive either, for the reasons Descartes described; you can't prove the nonexistence of an omnipresent demon who adjusts your sensory information at just the right time and in just the right ways to make you believe something other than the truth. Still we hazard coming to conclusions and change our minds when the time comes.
- aatd86 3y agoYou can prove a negative. People always make that mistake but that's not true that you can't prove a negative. In any case, I was being tongue-in-cheek hence the smiley. My statement is still true. That we have no evidence of the existence of aliens doesn't mean they don't exist. We just don't have proofs. I don't know why people are getting so worked up by my little comment. :)
- maxbond 3y ago> You can prove a negative. I'd be interested to hear more. > In any case, I was being tongue-in-cheek hence the smiley. > I don't know why people are getting so worked up by my little comment. :) I'm certainly not getting worked up. You said something and I responded to it, because I thought the topic was interesting and worth responding to. If you're suggesting the egg is on my face for taking you seriously, well okay, but I think that's being disrespectful to yourself.