On the Existence of Garage Dragons
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-08-2015, 02:42 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:37 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:22 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  What do you think Sagan is talking about when he says that it's arrogant to exclude the possibility? How about loch ness? Sagan is very clear that lack of evidence doesn't disprove the claim, but rather it leaves it unproved.

Please watch 14:33 to 16:53 to learn how skeptical scientists like Sagan approach claims.




Yeah, I am aware what Sagan is getting at, I prefer to extrapolate further.

No support for a position leaves it not only unproved, but lacking in expected evidence. So the claim of existence is rejected until the burden of proof is met.

I also reject claims that have no evidence, but lack of evidence doesn't automatically lead me to the conclusion that the claim is false, only unproved (as Sagan puts it).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 02:43 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:41 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:38 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  They have not yet met their burden of proof and are not deemed possible given the paucity of evidence for their existence.

I agree, but I would go further in that they have also not been disproved. We don't know that other universes don't exist.

How do you disprove (prove in the negative sense) the nonexistence of anything that doesn't exist or anything that didn't occur?

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
21-08-2015, 02:43 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:42 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:37 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Yeah, I am aware what Sagan is getting at, I prefer to extrapolate further.

No support for a position leaves it not only unproved, but lacking in expected evidence. So the claim of existence is rejected until the burden of proof is met.

I also reject claims that have no evidence, but lack of evidence doesn't automatically lead me to the conclusion that the claim is false, only unproved (as Sagan puts it).

Okay. Why do I care? I am telling you why I think that is a weak argument and telling you my opinion.

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
21-08-2015, 02:44 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:42 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:37 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Yeah, I am aware what Sagan is getting at, I prefer to extrapolate further.

No support for a position leaves it not only unproved, but lacking in expected evidence. So the claim of existence is rejected until the burden of proof is met.

Sagan's point is that a claim that SHOULD have evidence to support its existence can be found and its existence demonstrated.

But any claim that provides no way of testing it, is indistinguishable from nonexistence. So, treat it as such.

I disagree because he specifically describes that as arrogance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 02:45 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:44 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:42 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Sagan's point is that a claim that SHOULD have evidence to support its existence can be found and its existence demonstrated.

But any claim that provides no way of testing it, is indistinguishable from nonexistence. So, treat it as such.

I disagree because he specifically describes that as arrogance.

Okay, I don't care. I am a big boy, I can think for myself.

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
21-08-2015, 02:47 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:41 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I agree, but I would go further in that they have also not been disproved. We don't know that other universes don't exist.

How do you disprove (prove in the negative sense) the nonexistence of anything that doesn't exist or anything that didn't occur?

There's no need to disprove things that don't exist. A good scientist stays open minded and let's the evidence guide his decisions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 02:48 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:47 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  How do you disprove (prove in the negative sense) the nonexistence of anything that doesn't exist or anything that didn't occur?

There's no need to disprove things that don't exist. A good scientist stays open minded and let's the evidence guide his decisions.

Yeah, I know how science works. Thanks for the update.

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
21-08-2015, 02:49 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:42 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I also reject claims that have no evidence, but lack of evidence doesn't automatically lead me to the conclusion that the claim is false, only unproved (as Sagan puts it).

Okay. Why do I care? I am telling you why I think that is a weak argument and telling you my opinion.

Fair enough! Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 02:59 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:44 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:42 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Sagan's point is that a claim that SHOULD have evidence to support its existence can be found and its existence demonstrated.

But any claim that provides no way of testing it, is indistinguishable from nonexistence. So, treat it as such.

I disagree because he specifically describes that as arrogance.

I think not. He said there is no way to differentiate the undetectable from the non-existent.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
21-08-2015, 03:08 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 02:59 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 02:44 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I disagree because he specifically describes that as arrogance.

I think not. He said there is no way to differentiate the undetectable from the non-existent.

If you pay close attention, you'll notice that Sagan thinks it's arrogant to assume falseness of unproven claims.

14:33 - 16:53


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: