Evidence Of Absence.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2015, 08:56 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:54 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  By the absence of evidence for its impossibility.


How very droll. Drinking Beverage

I think I somewhat agree with free here. Just because we can't prove something is impossible, doesn't mean that it is possible. It works both ways. Just because we can't prove something is possible, doesn't mean that it's impossible.

And, yes, the claim that god is possible requires evidence that proves it.

Interestingly, I never made that claim. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
23-08-2015, 08:58 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:50 PM)Free Wrote:  Indefinitely?

I could be wrong ...

Current power storage technologies all 'leak'. A superconductor-based power storage might not leak.

Ah. Now I understand.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 08:58 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:54 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I think I somewhat agree with free here. Just because we can't prove something is impossible, doesn't mean that it is possible. It works both ways. Just because we can't prove something is possible, doesn't mean that it's impossible.

And, yes, the claim that god is possible requires evidence that proves it.

Interestingly, I never made that claim. Drinking Beverage

I didn't mean to imply that you did. I was just noting that in that regard I agree with free.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 08:59 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:50 PM)Free Wrote:  Indefinitely?

I could be wrong ...

Current power storage technologies all 'leak'. A superconductor-based power storage might not leak.

Just so. Any current transmission or storage of energy is a lossy process. Inevitably so, given thermodynamics... Superconductivity presents the possibility of decreasing that loss in a way which is simply not possible by other means.

Shitty analogy time! If you store extra water in an open-air pond, it will evaporate and drain away. If you store it in an isolated watertight chamber, on the other hand...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 09:15 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:07 PM)Free Wrote:  I don't think these are great analogies to compare to something that has no evidence for its existence at all, such as the God claim. I mean we know pigs exist, albeit, they don't fly. And jackals exist. We can counter or confirm those things. They can be falsified and/or proven.

But the positive claim of existence of God is unfalsifiable save for the Evidence of Absence, and unprovable due to no physical or demonstrable evidence.

The positive claim that there is a possibility that God could exist lacks the exact same evidence required to support the positive claim that God does exist.

Hence, both the proposed possibility and the asserted actuality of the existence of God lack even a shred of evidence to qualify either as being an existence.

How do we claim that something is possible when it lacks any and all evidence for its existence?

By the absence of evidence for its impossibility.

Quote:I don't understand. It simply ... doesn't parse.

How very droll. Drinking Beverage

Chas,

It sounds to me like you are saying that if we have no evidence that something is impossible, that this alone is evidence that it is possible. Any chance you could elaborate?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 09:24 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 08:36 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:29 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  What blatant dishonesty?

...

(23-08-2015 10:36 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  They aren't the same. That is the straw man. You are assuming you know something about what I actually did say, and you twist it into what you want.

If the man you're directly quoting says that he didn't mean what you're saying he meant, that's generally taken as a sign to reconsider your representation of him.

Do you agree with TBD that we can conclude aliens don't exist?

Can you see the fallacy he's committing?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2015, 06:32 AM
Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 09:24 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 08:36 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ...


If the man you're directly quoting says that he didn't mean what you're saying he meant, that's generally taken as a sign to reconsider your representation of him.

Do you agree with TBD that we can conclude aliens don't exist?

Can you see the fallacy he's committing?

I've never gotten my apologies. Drinking Beverage

Also, stop fucking partially quoting me. If you want to ask someone if they agree with what I've said, quote the whole fucking thing. You're misleading people, you dishonest twit.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2015, 06:42 AM (This post was last modified: 24-08-2015 07:10 AM by Matt Finney.)
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(22-08-2015 07:22 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(22-08-2015 07:16 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  No, just no. Facepalm

Making conclusions on suggestive evidence is not wise. People who are interested in truth, form hypotheses from suggestive evidence. Then we go about trying to falsify and/or validate that hypothesis. Lack of validation doesn't render the hypothesis false, and likewise, lack of falsification doesn't validate the hypothesis. If we continue to gather more positive evidence than negative evidence, we might form a working hypothesis, or perhaps even a theory, but for those of us who are only interested in truth, we don't make a conclusion until we have conclusive evidence.

What about if you reinsert Chas's "tentative"? That seems reasonable enough, doesn't it?

Dodgy

DLJ,

The reason I press on this issue, is because I think our (atheists) best approach in the god debate is not to convince people that there is no evidence for god, because many theists believe that the origin of the universe and the origin of life are suggestive evidence for at a minimum, something supernatural. Until we can fully explain those things, we aren't going to convince them that they have no suggestive evidence. But, I think there is ground to be made in teaching skepticism and critical reasoning. I think it's pretty easy to get theists to agree that their evidence for god is not conclusive. Even the firmest of believers will usually admit that belief in god requires faith, and faith is only required in the absence of conclusive evidence. If we can get people to agree that it's unwise to take suggestive evidence and then draw a conclusion from that, then perhaps we could be closer to getting the religious to accept that their "belief" in god, is really just a hypothesis based on their interpretation of suggestive evidence. If we atheists are guilty of the same thing, i.e. taking evidence that we feel suggests no god, and then going ahead and concluding that there is no god, then we are guilty of the same flaw (faith), and our case becomes much less convincing.

I think our best possible approach is not to try to convince people that there is either no evidence, or negating evidence for god, but rather to try to convince them that suggestive evidence is not enough to draw a conclusion. We need to learn to be comfortable without conclusions. After all, there are quite a few things that we just don't know yet.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2015, 06:46 AM
Evidence Of Absence.
We don't care what you think the best approach is. Stop straw manning and misrepresenting what we say.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
24-08-2015, 06:47 AM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(23-08-2015 09:15 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  if we have no evidence that something is impossible, that this alone is evidence that it is possible.

Isn't that just trivially true?

I have no evidence that something is impossible
I have no reason to conclude that it is not possible
I must conclude that it is *possible*

Talking in terms of propositions, I take it that "possible" means that it has a truth value not yet determined. So if I have a proposition which I do not *know* for certain has the truth value False, then it *must* be possible that it is *True*.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: