4 ms·

Really? I thought it was almost impossible to prove a negative. "You eat babies in your spare time!" "No, no I don't." The 1st can produce a picture of the

by drone 14y ago

Really? I thought it was almost impossible to prove a negative. "You eat babies in your spare time!" "No, no I don't." The 1st can produce a picture of the person eating a baby, how does the 2nd prove that he doesn't eat babies? If the person who had the claim made against them had to definitively prove that beyond a doubt he doesn't eat babies - he'd have to have had someone recording him for every minute of his waking life, including those moments prior to the claim. The only way to prove a negative is to run a (perhaps nearly) infinite number of tests and never get that result.

ktizo 14y ago
Really? I thought it was almost impossible to prove a negative. Go read Karl Popper on falsifiability.
- drone 14y ago
  ... and most of the examples shows proving a positive as well, and also clearly exerts why the statement I said in my post is not falsifiable. Your original statement, was, btw, "it is almost impossible to prove a positive." So, how is it nearly impossible to prove "this swan is white," but highly possible to prove "no swan has ever been black?" I can prove there is a mouse that is blue and black on my desk, but I cannot prove that there has never been a red and black mouse on my desk, I can only assert such.
- dkokelley 14y ago
  Why don't you try your best to summarize the pertinent aspects of falsifiability for the community? I'll try to start. Here's some background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Jesse_Ray 14y ago
There is no trouble in proving a negative that does not exist for proving a positive. For example, you can prove to your own satisfaction that there are no monkeys on your shoulder, even though that is a negative claim. The problem of proof to which you alluded with your example is just the famous problem of induction, which exists for both positive and negative claims. The negative claim that so-and-so has never eaten a baby is difficult to prove because that claim is actually a group of claims: so-and-so was not eating babies at time one, time two, time three, etc. Each and every claim in that sequence could be proven with a photograph that shows so-and-so doing something other than eating babies. Each negative in that sequence is provable. The problem is the length of the sequence: you need hundreds and hundreds of proofs. You would have the same trouble with any similar sequence of positive claims, such as the sequence entailed by the statement that there is a human-habitable planet in one out of ten solar systems.
- amalcon 14y ago
  Exactly, it has nothing to do with negativity. What people generally mean is: "It's almost impossible to prove a universal proposition." This is because doing so would involve examining all things to which that proposition would apply. That's equally difficult whether you're trying to prove that "All swans are white" or "No swans are black": the only ways to conclusively prove either involve examining large numbers of objects.

by drone 14y ago

ktizo 14y ago

Really? I thought it was almost impossible to prove a negative. Go read Karl Popper on falsifiability.

drone 14y ago
... and most of the examples shows proving a positive as well, and also clearly exerts why the statement I said in my post is not falsifiable. Your original statement, was, btw, "it is almost impossible to prove a positive." So, how is it nearly impossible to prove "this swan is white," but highly possible to prove "no swan has ever been black?" I can prove there is a mouse that is blue and black on my desk, but I cannot prove that there has never been a red and black mouse on my desk, I can only assert such.
dkokelley 14y ago
Why don't you try your best to summarize the pertinent aspects of falsifiability for the community? I'll try to start. Here's some background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Jesse_Ray 14y ago

There is no trouble in proving a negative that does not exist for proving a positive. For example, you can prove to your own satisfaction that there are no monkeys on your shoulder, even though that is a negative claim. The problem of proof to which you alluded with your example is just the famous problem of induction, which exists for both positive and negative claims. The negative claim that so-and-so has never eaten a baby is difficult to prove because that claim is actually a group of claims: so-and-so was not eating babies at time one, time two, time three, etc. Each and every claim in that sequence could be proven with a photograph that shows so-and-so doing something other than eating babies. Each negative in that sequence is provable. The problem is the length of the sequence: you need hundreds and hundreds of proofs. You would have the same trouble with any similar sequence of positive claims, such as the sequence entailed by the statement that there is a human-habitable planet in one out of ten solar systems.

amalcon 14y ago
Exactly, it has nothing to do with negativity. What people generally mean is: "It's almost impossible to prove a universal proposition." This is because doing so would involve examining all things to which that proposition would apply. That's equally difficult whether you're trying to prove that "All swans are white" or "No swans are black": the only ways to conclusively prove either involve examining large numbers of objects.