3 ms·
> The thing is that "No Evidence" is just flat untrue. If Crazy Carl says that aliens abducted his prize turnip, that is in itself evidence that aliens did the
by CoastalCoder 3y ago
> The thing is that "No Evidence" is just flat untrue. If Crazy Carl says that aliens abducted his prize turnip, that is in itself evidence that aliens did the deed. It is wildly unpersuasive evidence, but nonetheless evidence.
I've encountered a similar issue in arguments for / against various religious claims.
Even when people are arguing in good faith, there's sometimes a disagreement about what evidence is considered valid.
- hnfong 3y agoThe problem (in your case) about religion is when one side wants to convince the other side. For example, I have personal "spiritual" revelations that I acknowledge nobody in their right mind would believe unless they witnessed/experienced something similar themselves. (And I make this claim in good faith.) And this is actually fine. People hold different views because they have different experiences. And while communication can narrow the gap, it doesn't eliminate it completely. I think it's an actually interesting thought experiment to suspend your disbelief about whatever you currently believe about alien abductions, and imagine that you actually experienced it yourself. What could you have said to convince people it actually happened? Is there a way to not become Crazy Carl besides pretending it didn't happen?