Triky, treky, tricie.
2007-09-08 08:13:53 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
It is logically impossible to prove that an object or event does not exist. However, it is the essence and the backbone of science to provide evidence that something does exist. If something exists, such as energy, matter or space, it manifests itself to us by objective evidence. We can measure such manifestations or we can take objective images of them.
It is axiomatic in the affairs of man, and steeped in common sense that, whoever makes a claim, has to prove its validity. The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
If a person should claim that the moon is made of green cheese, he has to prove that the moon actually consists of green cheese, instead of rock, as established by previous, hard, factual, objective evidence. It is logically impossible and absurd to demand that, whoever does not accept the claim that the moon is made of green cheese, should disprove the claim.
Only persons, who do not utilize logic, will accept as true statements that are completely unsupported by factual evidence. Yet, this form of irrationality and lack of fundamental logic is the foundation of all religions. Since approximately 80 % of the world population accepts the completely unsubstantiated statements of various religions, 80 % of the world population suffers from a severely distorted and thus ineffective worldview.
2007-09-08 10:12:37 · answer #1 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously it doesn't mean that it exists, but remember that plate tectonics 'didn't exist' 50 years go, adams are less than 100 years old, I still don't know if dark matter exists in space. There is so much that science and man believe but can't prove because they just don't know how to prove it. Science is great with the known world, but it also has to live in the unknown world with the rest of us, and we all have to take leaps now and again on things that can't be proven or disproven because we're just not there yet.
2007-09-08 17:35:25 · answer #2 · answered by locusfire 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like the invisible pink unicorn answer. If I would go further into the answer: I would say that my invisible pink unicorn exists because I decide that it does.
Anything can exist in our minds if we believe it does. But I think we would then be talking about what is actually real if we go deeper into this question.
2007-09-08 18:57:14 · answer #3 · answered by tristan-adams 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. It goes back to the "invisible pink unicorn" argument. Can you prove that there is not one standing right next to you that is only making itself visible to me? No. Does it therefore exist? You know the answer to that.
2007-09-08 16:55:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it means you haven't yet found the source that knows the answer. All answers to everything exist you just have to find the one who knows.
2007-09-08 15:18:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If something cannot be disprove, then it for all we know it may exist. However, the lack of disproof of something is not proof.
In other words, it may or may not exist.
2007-09-08 17:10:49 · answer #6 · answered by knowalotlearnalot 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It simply means we can't prove it exists or not.
2007-09-08 15:38:43 · answer #7 · answered by red 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it means that it has not yet been proven or disproven. Period.
2007-09-08 15:46:50 · answer #8 · answered by naniannie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, its means its in conclusive
2007-09-08 17:58:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋