The Burden of Proof
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-10-2015, 04:25 PM
RE: The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:19 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 03:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  Questions of existence and questions of science are not answered by a court of law.

You and BlowJob need to stop conflating these.

Courts of law deal with consideration of evidence, in regards to violations of the law, and criminal activity.

Scientific truth is not decided by a jury of unqualified people, nor is the standard of evidence the same.

Quote:Now are you suggesting that the meaning of "evidence" in a court of law, is distinct from the meaning of evidence in the field of "biology" and "physics"?

Yes, I am. The standards are, in fact, different.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
20-10-2015, 04:29 PM
RE: The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 03:08 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  There is a compelling lack of evidence for a positive claim of Potter's existence. There is however, no evidence of nonexistence as that implies a proof positive demonstration of the conclusion of nonexistence.

Let's go with the conclusion of fictional, as oppose to nonexistent.

Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards are evidence of a person existence.

What if some government agency, that wants to insure that works composed after a set date, allow for no room for confusion by later generations as to which characters and events are fictional vs historical. Authors composing works they see as falling under the genre of fiction, must submit their works to this agency, that insures their stories and characters are not modeled after any historical person, or describe actual historical events. After some stringent investigation, they provide official certifications identity fictional works.

Would these certification serve as evidence that the characters and events described in these works are fictional?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2015, 04:30 PM
The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:29 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 03:08 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  There is a compelling lack of evidence for a positive claim of Potter's existence. There is however, no evidence of nonexistence as that implies a proof positive demonstration of the conclusion of nonexistence.

Let's go with the conclusion of fictional, as oppose to nonexistent.

Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards are evidence of a person existence.

What if some government agency, that wants to insure that works composed after a set date, allow for no room for confusion by later generations as to which characters and events are fictional vs historical. Authors composing works they see as falling under the genre of fiction, must submit their works to this agency, that insures their stories and characters are not modeled after any historical person, or describe actual historical events. After some stringent investigation, they provide official certifications identity fictional works.

Would these certification serve as evidence that the characters and events described in these works are fictional?

Another red herring.

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
20-10-2015, 04:31 PM
The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:29 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 03:08 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  There is a compelling lack of evidence for a positive claim of Potter's existence. There is however, no evidence of nonexistence as that implies a proof positive demonstration of the conclusion of nonexistence.

Let's go with the conclusion of fictional, as oppose to nonexistent.

Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards are evidence of a person existence.

What if some government agency, that wants to insure that works composed after a set date, allow for no room for confusion by later generations as to which characters and events are fictional vs historical. Authors composing works they see as falling under the genre of fiction, must submit their works to this agency, that insures their stories and characters are not modeled after any historical person, or describe actual historical events. After some stringent investigation, they provide official certifications identity fictional works.

Would these certification serve as evidence that the characters and events described in these works are fictional?

You've simply tried to extrapolate the copyright claim into additional copyright claims. Facepalm

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
20-10-2015, 04:34 PM
RE: The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:Now are you suggesting that the meaning of "evidence" in a court of law, is distinct from the meaning of evidence in the field of "biology" and "physics"?

Yes, I am. The standards are, in fact, different.

Would you say the standards are the same or different in the field of "biology" vs "physics"? Or does evidence mean something different for a physicist as opposed to a biologist?

Does evidence have the same meaning for a theoretical physicist and a geologist?

Could you possibly divide academic fields that have the same standards and use the same meaning of evidence, from those that don't? Would it be like a hard science vs. soft science divide?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2015, 04:36 PM
The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:29 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 03:08 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  There is a compelling lack of evidence for a positive claim of Potter's existence. There is however, no evidence of nonexistence as that implies a proof positive demonstration of the conclusion of nonexistence.

Let's go with the conclusion of fictional, as oppose to nonexistent.

Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards are evidence of a person existence.

What if some government agency, that wants to insure that works composed after a set date, allow for no room for confusion by later generations as to which characters and events are fictional vs historical. Authors composing works they see as falling under the genre of fiction, must submit their works to this agency, that insures their stories and characters are not modeled after any historical person, or describe actual historical events. After some stringent investigation, they provide official certifications identity fictional works.

Would these certification serve as evidence that the characters and events described in these works are fictional?

It's also worth pointing out that the premise for which you claim evidence exists is nonexistence. So you going with the "conclusion of fictional" is something you've claimed you can show evidence for.

And instead of doing so, you provide a hypothetical that is an expansion of something you've already said that also fails to be evidence of nonexistence or fictionality.

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
20-10-2015, 04:37 PM
The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:34 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yes, I am. The standards are, in fact, different.

Would you say the standards are the same or different in the field of "biology" vs "physics"? Or does evidence mean something different for a physicist as opposed to a biologist?

Does evidence have the same meaning for a theoretical physicist and a geologist?

Could you possibly divide academic fields that have the same standards and use the same meaning of evidence, from those that don't? Would it be like a hard science vs. soft science divide?

More red herrings in your attempt to redefine what you consider to be evidence. You can't simply redefine words in order to try and support your myths.

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
20-10-2015, 04:39 PM
RE: The Burden of Proof
(20-10-2015 04:34 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-10-2015 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yes, I am. The standards are, in fact, different.

Would you say the standards are the same or different in the field of "biology" vs "physics"? Or does evidence mean something different for a physicist as opposed to a biologist?

Does evidence have the same meaning for a theoretical physicist and a geologist?

Could you possibly divide academic fields that have the same standards and use the same meaning of evidence, from those that don't? Would it be like a hard science vs. soft science divide?

What is a soft science? Psychology? Sociology? Economics?

Red herring. You need to stop doing that.

Evidence is determined by the same standards in the sciences: testable predictions, controlled experiments, relying on quantifiable data and mathematical models, a high degree of accuracy and objectivity.

That is not the same as legal evidence.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
20-10-2015, 04:39 PM
The Burden of Proof
Tomasia, are you ready to accept that there is no such thing as evidence of nonexistence or evidence a character is fictional? Ready to admit that an absence of evidence is all that could be expected for something that doesn't exist? Ready to admit you're wrong?

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
20-10-2015, 04:41 PM
The Burden of Proof
Ready to admit that someone writing about someone, doesn't make them real or mean that the character is based on a real person?

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: