3 ms·
Has it been proven that it "likely isn't real"?
by pjaoko 8mo ago
Has it been proven that it "likely isn't real"?
- tonyedgecombe 8mo agoIt's much harder to prove the non-existence of something than the existence.
- ChrisGreenHeur 8mo agoJust show the concept either is not where it is claimed to be or that it is incoherent.
- mrbombastic 8mo agoI say this as someone who believes in a higher being, we have played this game before, the ethereal thing can just move to someplace science can’t get to, it is not really a valid argument for existence.
- ChrisGreenHeur 8mo agowhat argument?
- pjaoko 8mo agoThe question wasn't about which is harder, it was asking for proof.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- castis 8mo agoThe burden of proof lies on those who say it exists, not the other way around.
- ChrisGreenHeur 8mo agoThe burden of proof lies on whoever wants to convince someone else of something. in this case the guy that wants to convince people it likely is not real.
- mrandish 8mo agoThe original poster stated > "The human brain is mutable, the human "soul" is a concept thats not proven yet and likely isn't real." The soul is "a concept that's not proven yet." It's unproven because there's no convincing evidence for the proposition. By definition, in the absence of convincing evidence, the null hypothesis of any proposition is presumed to be more likely. The presumed likelihood of the null hypothesis is not a positive assertion which creates a burden of proof. It's the presumed default state of all possible propositions - even those yet to be imagined. In other words, pointing out 'absence of evidence' is not asserting 'evidence of absence'. See: Russell's Teapot and Sagan's Dragon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot)
- ChrisGreenHeur 8mo agoIt is not the case that x is proven due to having y evidence pointing in its direction. That's not how any of this works.
- pjaoko 8mo agoDo you exist?
- jstanley 8mo agoBefore we start discussing whether it's "real" can we all agree on what it "is"? I doubt it.
- dalmo3 8mo agoWe can't even agree on what "is" is...
- kortex 8mo agoHow about: maybe some things lie outside of the purview of empiricism and materialism, the belief in which does not radically impact one's behavior so long as they have a decent moral compass otherwise, can be taken on faith, and "proving" it does exist or doesn't exist is a pointless argument, since it exists outside of that ontological system.
- pjaoko 8mo ago> maybe some things lie outside of the purview of empiricism and materialism Maybe? So your whole premise is based on a maybe! It was a simple question, don't know where or how morality and behavior comes into play..