Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Proving a positive/negative
    #14316512 - 04/19/11 10:33 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

This is a fairly simple concept. Not sure why so many people seem to either struggle with it or use their misunderstanding as some sort of 'gotcha' argument.

Let's recap with a well-understood concept. Can man fly?

Only takes one solid example to prove the positive - Yes, man can fly.

The thousands of previous failed attempts do NOT prove that man cannot fly. And no number of failed attempts would prove such.

Now, I am sure that in our own wacky S&P style, we can make this super-complicated and carry on for pages with semantic quibbles.

Now as DieCommie (I believe) pointed out in another thread, "I can prove there is no beer in my fridge." He is mostly correct when discussing a solid object in a limited, confined space, but that is rarely (read: never) what we are discussing here.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14316579 - 04/19/11 10:47 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Every negative is the negation of a positive, every positive is the negation of a negative.  All concepts can be cast as a negative or a positive depending on your language.  There is no inherent preference to casting an object as a negative or a positive, there is only cultural and personal preference.

The distinction between the two is arbitrary and moot.

(Particularly considering that 'proof' is a concept that lives best within mathematical or logical frameworks, and its certainly possible to prove 'negatives' in those frameworks.  In real life we live with degrees of certainty, and both negatives and positives have a spectrum of possible certainties that can apply to them.)


Edited by DieCommie (04/19/11 10:52 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: DieCommie]
    #14316605 - 04/19/11 10:52 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Good idea to start off with a quibble rather than address my example. :thumbup:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14316608 - 04/19/11 10:54 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

I figured Id cut to the chase since your example was just a boring no-brainer.

What do you want to know about your example?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: DieCommie]
    #14316624 - 04/19/11 10:57 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Of course I start with  a no-brainer because the positive and negative are very clear. There is no 'degree of certitude' as you claim. It is 100% certitude.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14316647 - 04/19/11 11:02 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

There is no 'degree of certitude' as you claim. It is 100% certitude.




Sounds like the rantings of a true believer.  OC, I thought you were better than that.  :shrug:

I take scientific philosophy seriously as my personal philosophy.  I ascribe to degrees of certain hood for everything (except possibly 'cogito ero sum').


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: DieCommie]
    #14316684 - 04/19/11 11:10 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Rantings? Overstate much?

What is you precentage of certitude man can fly?

(Here we go again with the many pages of nonsensical quibbles. :rolleyes:)


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14316703 - 04/19/11 11:14 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

With aid of a device?  Well over 99.99%
Without the aid of a device?  Well under 0.001%

(Off hand, I would guess significance in the 10-20 range, or more.)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: DieCommie]
    #14321760 - 04/20/11 07:21 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

There are different kinds of logic that apply depending on the context.

Although it's true that nothing outside of math is absolutely provable (except cogito ero sum, and I'm not so certain about that), I think what OC is getting at is in the context of conversational (informal) logic or argumentation theory.

Math expressly proves the negative, for example denying the consequent in the modus tollens form of formal logic ( pq ¬q¬p ), but in conversational logic you can't in fact prove the negative.

You can't prove that the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist by showing me that she doesn't exist in your closet because she may be in another closet. You can't prove it by showing me she's not in any closet on Earth because she may be in your bathroom.

Show me every bathroom and she may live on Mars. And so on. It' is essentially impossible to prove to me that she doesn't exist (in the context of informal logic which is the relevant form in most PS&P threads).

However, you can prove to me that she DOES exist by simply introducing her to me once, anywhere.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: Diploid]
    #14321793 - 04/20/11 07:36 AM (12 years, 9 months ago)

There is copious amounts of evidence against the tooth fairy.  Evidence from physics, biology, ecology, sociology, anthropology and history.  All of that evidence points to a strong suggestion that there is no tooth fairy.  Its as close to proof as you are gonna get, and its a 'negative' as defined in this thread.

There is no need to appeal to faith to deny the tooth fairy, the evidence abounds.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSimms
Fuckwit
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/17/08
Posts: 1,109
Loc: Somewhere in Europe
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14323408 - 04/20/11 02:51 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
This is a fairly simple concept. Not sure why so many people seem to either struggle with it or use their misunderstanding as some sort of 'gotcha' argument.

Let's recap with a well-understood concept. Can man fly?

Only takes one solid example to prove the positive - Yes, man can fly.

The thousands of previous failed attempts do NOT prove that man cannot fly. And no number of failed attempts would prove such.






Thousands of failed attempts of proving Gods existense does not prove that God does not exist. Your atheism is just an ignorant blind belief!!!


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: Simms]
    #14323433 - 04/20/11 02:58 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Wow, that is deep! :wow:

How is that different than what I wrote?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblequinn
some kinda love
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/02/10
Posts: 6,799
Re: Proving a positive/negative [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14323553 - 04/20/11 03:21 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Now, I am sure that in our own wacky S&P style, we can make this super-complicated and carry on for pages with semantic quibbles.



Quote:

Every negative is the negation of a positive, every positive is the negation of a negative.



Quote:

( p→q ¬q∴¬p )



Quote:

Your atheism is just an ignorant blind belief!!!





:rofldrunk:


--------------------
dripping with fantasy


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* You Can't Prove A Negative
( 1 2 3 all )
DiploidM 2,709 47 10/12/04 04:54 PM
by Diploid
* Positive/Negative Imprints fireworks_godS 1,128 4 06/28/04 07:22 AM
by Viaggio
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 21,744 157 12/21/04 06:31 AM
by deafpanda
* Positive cause CleverName 773 6 04/07/04 09:12 PM
by SpecialEd
* Don't be negative, JERK!!!
( 1 2 3 all )
Mixomatosis 2,941 43 01/30/10 07:46 PM
by deCypher
* The Power of Positive Thinking
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 2,996 44 09/02/04 06:12 PM
by spudamore
* Taking an Unpopular Position
( 1 2 3 all )
Huehuecoyotl 3,228 43 11/07/04 04:56 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* New Study On Positive Thinking and Cancer
( 1 2 all )
Swami 2,754 27 02/10/04 02:47 PM
by tekramrepus

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,113 topic views. 0 members, 7 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.