Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 10:27 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
#11
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
edit--
Reply
#12
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
To paraphrase Neil DeGrasse Tyson:

"If you go out into the woods, and you look for bear tracks, bear scat, and bear markings, then you find that there are none, you have proven that a bear isn't in those woods. Not conclusively, but enough so that you can feel safe letting your kids play in the woods."

So I'd say, yeah, pretty much. A little catch phrase I've created is, "Lack of evidence is evidence until further evidence is presented."
Reply
#13
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
Simplified version:

If proof is not provided over thousands of years, guess what?
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Reply
#14
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
Iggy Wrote:Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?

Yes.
Reply
#15
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
Can we detect everything there is to detect? Are there extant things/patterns/states beyond our ability to detect? (yet)

There is what we know, there are known unknowns and there are unknown unknowns.

Absence of evidence is evidence of needing to develop better questions, leading to new perceptions/information and new ways of thinking about the information we already have. Someone had to experiment with the nature of magnetism to develop the compass to navigate the globe. Someone had to play with electricity to find out how it could be uses to convey information. Now we are technologically expressing and perceiving as a planetary society near instantaneously.

Only those who are looking for evidence will find it.
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
Reply
#16
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
Are there things we can't detect? If I had to guess, I'd say it's extremely likely.

My problem is when people claim to have knowledge about these things.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#17
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
(August 21, 2016 at 4:51 am)robvalue Wrote: Are there things we can't detect? If I had to guess, I'd say it's extremely likely.

My problem is when people claim to have knowledge about these things.

Say you are in the middle of the ocean and you can't see the edge, but concentric waves rings are converging right next to where you are. What can you deduce? Anything?
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
Reply
#18
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
@The OP Q.

You can try, but it's going to be difficult, as proof has a distinct and stringent set of requirements that exceed those for, for example, evidence. A modus tollens is a proof by means of absence, but you need the full spread of conditions to establish that it's a valid application , or a sound application...to -prove- it. Once you open that can of worms some really strange things happen in the conflux between propositional logic and natural language.

P implies q, not q, therefore not p. Seems simple...right, now try to plug english words in and watch how hilariously -anyone- with an interest can object.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#19
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
I think with unfalsifiable topics like god, nobody can give us conclusive proof.
What's left? Anecdotes, subjective evidence?

Ths is why theists love putting god in any dark gap of science.
Not so much to convince atheists, but because they are more than happy with the lack of proof of his non existence.
This way, no one can touch their delicate beliefs and can sleep comfortably at night.

To atheists, lack of evidence is why most agnostics don't believe.
But for many theists, it's the only reason they do believe.
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Reply
#20
RE: Can a lack of evidence be considered proof?
(May 27, 2016 at 8:40 pm)ignoramus Wrote: 1) If it's hot, sunny and dry outside, will anyone question that it's not cold, wet and raining?

2) If you do not have any hands, is that not proof that you didn't choke your neighbour to death?

3) If I love eating steak, is that not proof that I'm not a vegetarian?

4) If there is no trace of our sentient creator anywhere in the universe, does that not prove that he doesn't exist?

Theists, you don't have to be captain Obvious. Just use a tiny bit of common sense and trust your instincts.

Realise that wishing something to be real is nice but won't actually make it real.
Not even your God had the power to poof himself into existence....sorry...have a great day! Shy

Guess I'll play now.

1. Probably not. Unless I think globally, then probably yes.
2. No. Stop chocking me with your thighs. (wishful thinking?)
3. No. You just don't have access to animal flesh anymore.
4. If you mean god, YES.

3/4ths contrarian.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Proof of creation no atheist can debunk (100% bulletproof) insider432 277 118461 August 22, 2014 at 1:10 pm
Last Post: pgrimes15



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)