I often hear atheists tell Christians that you can't prove a negative when the Christians tell the atheists to prove there isn't a God after failing to prove that there is one. So what's the philosophical explanation behind "can't prove a negative"?
Proving a negative
- Thread starter QueHuong
- Start date
purplehippo
Elite Member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 45,626
- 12
- 81
proof of the existence of a creator God is all around you -- evolution is a theory -- hence not proveable
Proving that something doesn't exist is extremely difficult because you have to exhaust every possible way it could exist. Proving that something does exist is relatively simple because you only have to find one way.
That said, you can't prove conclusively that God does or does not exist because there's an element of faith in either belief. Scientifically proving something requires observation, and God can't be observed. What atheists and evolutionists will rarely admit is that their beliefs require as much if not more faith than Christians/creationists.
That said, you can't prove conclusively that God does or does not exist because there's an element of faith in either belief. Scientifically proving something requires observation, and God can't be observed. What atheists and evolutionists will rarely admit is that their beliefs require as much if not more faith than Christians/creationists.
that's not true, you can simply prove that if it exists, the existence would contradict a proven fact.
Yeah, I was more answering the "prove God doesn't exist" than the "prove a negative" problem. In your example you're still proving that something exists. Whatever corollaries you make off that are up to you.
the burden of proof is on the person making the positive affirmation, christians say there is a god, its there job to prove it.
a simple example that illustartes this:
i believe in a magical flying purple hippopotamus, he created the universe and all things in it. Now if i ask you to prove me wrong, there is no feasbale way you could do this because the hippo doesnt exsist.
The existence of God is hardly an axiom, in that it is not a universally recognized truth. I would say it's self-evident, but a lot of people disagree with me.
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
you can't prove that i'm not the 3rd ressurection of jesus.
its unprovable. what unprovable things do you choose to believe and how considering they are unprovable? by arbitrary whim? pretty much
you cant be the third cause im the 4th! and we cant be here at the same time ..... or can we?
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
Originally posted by: Ameesh
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
you can't prove that i'm not the 3rd ressurection of jesus.
its unprovable. what unprovable things do you choose to believe and how considering they are unprovable? by arbitrary whim? pretty much
you cant be the third cause im the 4th! and we cant be here at the same time ..... or can we?
you can't prove the rules didn't change
you can't prove ol pops didn't bend the rules What I mean is that it is unprovable -- you either accept God exists as an axiom or you don't.
It's just like Non-Euclidean geometry. In Euclidean geometry one of the axioms is "Two parallel lines never intercept". But in Non-Euclidean geometry you don't have this as one of the axioms (in this framework, two parallel lines can intercept!).
In both cases, you have a consistent mathematical system. It turns out that Non-Euclidean geometry better models the real world.
Anyways, it seems the existence of God is unprovable in our logic system (there is a very big theorem in logic that states that in every logic system you construct, you can always construct a statement that is unprovable).
Hence, you can either accept the existence of God as true or you can accept it as false. This is basically saying that the belief in the existence of God is based on faith.
Here is the simplest explanation I've found.
NOVA: What do you mean when you say that you cannot prove a negative?
KLASS: Let me give an example. No one has ever proved, to my knowledge, that Santa Claus does not exist. And if one were to fly to the North Pole and say: Well, look, there's no toy factory there. A believer could argue: Well, Santa Clause knew you were coming and moved his operations to the South Pole. So you fly down to the South Pole. No Santa Claus factory, toy factory there. So the believer would say: Oh, he moved it back up to the North Pole. So you simply cannot prove -- one cannot prove that ghosts do not exist; one cannot prove that leprechauns too do not exist. One simply cannot prove a negative.
NOVA: What do you mean when you say that you cannot prove a negative?
KLASS: Let me give an example. No one has ever proved, to my knowledge, that Santa Claus does not exist. And if one were to fly to the North Pole and say: Well, look, there's no toy factory there. A believer could argue: Well, Santa Clause knew you were coming and moved his operations to the South Pole. So you fly down to the South Pole. No Santa Claus factory, toy factory there. So the believer would say: Oh, he moved it back up to the North Pole. So you simply cannot prove -- one cannot prove that ghosts do not exist; one cannot prove that leprechauns too do not exist. One simply cannot prove a negative.
huh? God, by the christian definition, hears all sees all, answers prayers, is responsible for miracles, etc. show me proof of any of this. the only thing that 'everything around us' proves is the existence of matter. evolution, on the other hand, is an observable fact.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter