|
Well, in fairness I did find the reply slightly humorous too.
For my part I think it's fair to presume aliens are not among us absent evidence, but it's not entirely reasonable to make a claim that they do not exist among us absent evidence. It's overplaying one's hand. One might say it's unlikely, of course.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Proving a negative (outside a formal realm like mathematics) is impossible, which is why it's up to someone who asserts something to offer evidence. Otherwise you get things like, "The world is run by shape-shifting Reptilians." And I'm surprised you bothered to deny being the Reptilian Queen, because everyone knows it's Queen Elizabeth.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it's impossible perhaps and yet just the same, all I'm saying is that asserting something does not exist is also a claim and would require evidence. That it's a difficult or impossible claim to support really doesn't change that, as far as I'm concerned.
But that's why I try to avoid saying things like "aliens don't exist" or even "there are no gods" - regardless of likelihood. Life is one of the most unlikely events we know about, and yet here we are.
Now, that doesn't mean I operate on the assumption that those things do exist, but I wouldn't say that they don't definitively, if that makes sense.
And queen elizabeth is a cutout. 
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: Relativism and denying the evidence of your own senses is being a lefty?
This appears to be accurate.
On the other hand I originally read "leftie" to mean left handed.
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: I say prove it with tangible and irrefutable evidence
That is a common yet very weak and short-sighted argument. For example, prove to me that love exists. You can't. Yet you and I know that it does exist.
In other words there are all kinds of things we all know exist but that can't be proven using the scientific method. It's not a complete method and should not be used as gospel.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Love is a concept.
Aliens, if they do exist and are on this planet, would be tangible so show them.
If you want to prove that love exists, hurt my grandson. The hellfire my wife would bring down upon you would convince most people that love is real.
|
|
|
|
|
MarkTJohnson wrote: if they do exist and are on this planet, would be tangible so show them.
It's funny how people limit other life forms possibilities based on their own knowledge.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's fair to presume they do not absent evidence, but one must be willing to change their beliefs in light of evidence.
I also think it's a league too far to claim they do not exist absent evidence. I agree with you on that score.
That said, a presumption and an absolute claim are two different things, I think. A presumption isn't necessarily based in fact, but in expediency. It would probably be counterproductive to go through life assuming there were aliens among us. For starters, people will think you're crazy. 
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: absent evidence,
The funny thing about evidence is that it is subjective.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes and no.
Generally when evaluating evidence, the parties involved must agree on what constitutes evidence and the relative strengths of these.
In things like physics and neuroscience we use P values. Outside science, such as in informal debate we primarily rely on the use of logical propositions, and with questions of fact themselves again, the parties must agree on what constitutes evidence.
But within any arena, it is possible to come to that agreement, and it's little different than simply agreeing on the terms of debate more generally.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't say they didn't exist. I said that someone's gonna have to prove to me that they are living among us. Again - I'm willing to believe they do, but I want proof.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: but I want proof.
I know. That's what my comment was about.
Never mind.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
The great philosopher, Rama Kandra; on the human emotion of love No, it is a word. What matters is the connection the word implies.
It is very easy to prove that love exists; all you need to do is to look it up in the dictionary.
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
I've got relatives who claim that they have proof in a book. It is supposed to be sufficient proof that a non-human fellow coming from above is living among us, so strong that they devote their life to it. The problem is that I never get to meet this fellow, yet they claim he is present.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it just one book or is it a set of books written by multiple authors with different perspectives that corroborate each other? Is it just your relatives making this claim or has the claim been made by millions of people for thousands of years? Do other writings exist besides the book you mentioned that support the existence of this "fellow"? If the answer to these questions is "Yes" then maybe it shouldn't be dismissed so casually.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess there are multiple authors, and they certainly do not agree on the details. Like, one claims he was born under one king, another guy claims it was under another ruler who didn't come into power until twelve years after the first king died. One claims that his parents were living in his town of birth, but had to flee and lived as refugees abroad for quite some time, the other one claims they were living in a different town and just were passing that town on their way, and returned back to their home after the birth. And, these two authors give quite conflicting information about the fellow's forefathers.
Yet it all is undisputable Truth. So I have come to the conclusion that my relatives must be more knowledgeable than me about this "duality" that you probably are familiar with. Like light may appear both as particles and as waves (and my relatives refer to light all the time). Or quantum logic, where you have a multitude of alternate answers, with varying probability of being the correct one. Maybe they know enough to extend the same principle to this fellow, that the two dates of birth are both true answers, with different probability. I don't knwow which one they claim to be more probable; a couple weeks ago they proclaimed that was the one were the fellow was born while his parents were travelling through this town, but then again they also referred to the other author's referral to visitors giving gifts to the kid. But that is how it is with probabilities and quantum logic; each element of the story has its own probability, and does not rule out the others.
I sort of like those people who base their ideas on modern, logical thought (well... let us assume for now that quantum theory is logical). I am not much into that stuff, but my gut feeling is that they take this duality priciple and quantum probability stuff a little too far. But that is just my thoughts.
As far as I know, there are not many other documents about this fellow. When the book was collected, the editors rejected a handful of other authors, because their stories did not fit in with the image of the fellow that the editors wanted to promote.
There are a number of other books in the market, who tells similar stories about other tykes (and in fact, several of the stories about this fellow my relatives refer to have been accused of being plagiarism, as exactly the same story had been told about others long before the birth of this fellow). That may of course some question of probabilty as well, the probabilty of the stories being older but ascribed to this fellow, against the story being original but yet identical to what someone else did or experienced.
And, there is a different probability of this fellow having once lived, from the probabilty that he is still alive today (as my relatives claim). I think the latter probability depends a lot on the amount of provable evidence. So to me it seems as if the probability is very close to zero.
|
|
|
|
|
So do you believe in God?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm willing to believe, but have seen no tangible proof.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
According to the Cosmological Argument from Contingency, the universe itself is tangible proof. If you're willing, please take a look at this - Five Arguments for God
|
|
|
|
|
Fever905 wrote: So do you believe in God?
Which one of them?
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: but I need to see proof
Politicians. Does that count? 
|
|
|
|
|
Not that it's any more or less credible, but that's a Fox network website and not the Fox News website.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe they are, how else do you explain politicians?
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
/ravi
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
