I seem to be a little late here, but as a historian, I was taught to appreciate the difference between proof and evidence as distinct but related concepts:
A proof is an evaluated meaning of what evidence tells one in relation to a question, which gives a sound basis towards or against a hypothesis or theory.
Evidence is an observation, material, or other clue that can be used to lend credence towards the validation or rejection of a hypothesis or theory if its meaning in regards to the question being asked can be deciphered properly.
For instance, a bullet casing found at the scene of a murder is evidence, but what it means in connection to the question at hand is proof, should the meaning be deciphered.
Proof in this context is what the meaning evidence gives to the observer when the evidence is evaluated in terms of the question being asked, and how it can apply to the proposed hypothesis or theory. It's taken from the mathematical model of proof where using known variables one can bring about a conclusion using a mathematical model, which admittedly I don't fully comprehend since I'm not terribly math savvy, but that's the gist of it. For instance don't ask me how Steven Hawking made 2+2 equal 5, because I don't know! >m<
A proof is an evaluated meaning of what evidence tells one in relation to a question, which gives a sound basis towards or against a hypothesis or theory.
Evidence is an observation, material, or other clue that can be used to lend credence towards the validation or rejection of a hypothesis or theory if its meaning in regards to the question being asked can be deciphered properly.
For instance, a bullet casing found at the scene of a murder is evidence, but what it means in connection to the question at hand is proof, should the meaning be deciphered.
Proof in this context is what the meaning evidence gives to the observer when the evidence is evaluated in terms of the question being asked, and how it can apply to the proposed hypothesis or theory. It's taken from the mathematical model of proof where using known variables one can bring about a conclusion using a mathematical model, which admittedly I don't fully comprehend since I'm not terribly math savvy, but that's the gist of it. For instance don't ask me how Steven Hawking made 2+2 equal 5, because I don't know! >m<
If you believe it, question it. If you question it, get an answer. If you have an answer, does that answer satisfy reality? Does it satisfy you? Probably not. For no one else will agree with you, not really.
