|
|
| Re: Burden of Proof (Re: Atheist Billboard At Lincoln Tunnel Approach) (703048) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Burden of Proof (Re: Atheist Billboard At Lincoln Tunnel Approach) |
|
|
Posted by David Fairthorne on Thu Dec 2 13:19:33 2010, in response to Re: Burden of Proof (Re: Atheist Billboard At Lincoln Tunnel Approach), posted by JayMan on Wed Dec 1 21:31:33 2010. Facts have a built-in level of uncertainty with them, and no matter how sure we are of something, we can never be absolutely sure that they are correct. ... In science, we accept this level of uncertainty -- which is why we demand proof of something before we accept its reality and not give credence to propositions solely because they have not been disproved (especially if they are unfalsifiableInteresting post, Jay Man, and I think I see what you mean. For every scientific theory there must be sufficient observational evidence that it is true, and there must also be the possibility, at least in principle, that it could be disproved by contradictory evidence. But even if disproved, there is still a remote possibility that it may be true after all, which is your point. Of course the same applies with greater force to everyday (non-scientific) assertions and denials. For instance a rather low standard of proof (the opinion of twelve people) is sufficient to find someone guilty or not guilty in law. |
|
|
|