Is it illogical to believe the scientific axiom ...?

Question

"Nothing exists unless it has been proven to exist." Why?

Answer 1

Yes.

Answer 2

No. Because you cannot prove a negative.

The mere assertion that an entity exists is not proof that it does. The assertion that there is such a thing as a 'germ' (or an atom) can be independently verified by experiment as being true - even though a germ (or an atom) cannot be seen by the naked eye.

The assertion that there is such a thing as a loch-ness monster, yeti, god etc, cannot be proved, cannot be verified independently, and until it is proved to exist, science ignores it... It is not for science to speculate on the attributes of these alleged entities, until and unless this burden of proof is satisfied.

Answer 3

In cold hard science this is skepticism at its worse. Some scientists go about discovering the "why" of the existence of something before proving it scientifically exists, because:

Epistemology is the "proving grounds" of the mind. There were "atomists" thousands of years before the atom was ever seen. But they knew about atoms because logic "proved" their theory--to them if to no one else.

But that is the same as physics "proving" that time slows down and speeds up in different parts of the universe. They've proved it to themselves, but it may be 500 years before we have absolute, empirical proof of this.

Answer 4

it depends on what constitutes proof. theoretically, if our senses themselves are deceiving us, then nothing is provable.