- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Baylor University Survey On Religion: 'Almost No Atheists Voted For Trump'
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:37 am to AUveritas
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:37 am to AUveritas
quote:which indicates that you don't really get what people mean when they say it. When they say you can't prove a negative they are referring to things that don't already have absolute proof to the positive.
And I proved that there are negatives that can be proven. The
See my cheated on the wife example. It would be silly for me to say I can't prove I never cheated on my wife right after you showed video of me cheating on my wife. But if you simply accuse me of cheating on my wife with zero proof it's impossible for me to prove I didn't
1
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:38 am to AUveritas
quote:
Married bachelors do not exist.
Square triangles and circles do not exist.
Prove it.
quote:
Yes I did.
No, you didn't.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:38 am to CommoDawg
quote:
People who are more prone to use logic and reason didn't vote for an utter buffoon who makes things up
To be fair, I would bet that a higher percentage of people who believe that there are more than two genders and that humans can change sex voted for Hillary.
Because "reason and logic."
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:39 am to AUveritas
quote:
And I proved that there are negatives that can be proven. The original contention that one can't prove a negative is demonstrably false. Whether God can be proven to exist or not exist is a different discussion. I was pointing out that the blanket statement is simply wrong.
You used literal contradictions as your examples. Obviously contradictions can be disproved. Is it your opinion that belief in a deity is a literal contradiction or did you use that because it's the only way you could make the point?
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:40 am to ShortyRob
It simply means you can't prove things don't exist.
From Wiki:
A negative claim is a colloquialism for an affirmative claim that asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something
From Wiki:
A negative claim is a colloquialism for an affirmative claim that asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:42 am to northshorebamaman
No, I proved that it's possible to show something doesn't exist.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:42 am to AUveritas
quote:
It simply means you can't prove things don't exist.
So why are you reduced to using contradictions as your examples? You should be more cautious when accusing others of using fallacies.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:43 am to AUveritas
quote:that's what I said
It simply means you can't prove things don't exist.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:44 am to AUveritas
quote:
No, I proved that it's possible to show something doesn't exist.
No you didn't.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:44 am to AUveritas
quote:
No, I proved that it's possible to show something doesn't exist.
Yes. A giant midget is a contradiction. Is this really your gotcha?
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:47 am to northshorebamaman
It's proof that you can prove something doesn't exist.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:48 am to AUveritas
quote:
It simply means you can't prove things don't exist.
quote:
It's proof that you can prove something doesn't exist.
I'm not sure if you know what any of these words mean.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:49 am to AUveritas
quote:
It's proof that you can prove something doesn't exist.
No it isn't and it shows a massive hole in your understanding of the premise. The only thing you've proven is that impossible things can't exist.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:51 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
The only thing you've proven is that impossible things can't exist.
He hasn't even done that with his terrible examples, and the concepts inherent to religion aren't even necessary to say that.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:56 am to DisplacedBuckeye
I checked in on this thread to see why such a stupid assertion was worth so much discussion. I should have known that it would just be a vacuous debate led by evangelical athiests.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:57 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
He hasn't even done that with his terrible examples, and the concepts inherent to religion aren't even necessary to say that.
I'm trying to be nice but this is the kind of shite that makes you look forward to Skynet.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:57 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
The only thing you've proven is that impossible things can't exist.
Yes. And given the atheist contention that God is impossible, it's not impossible to prove He doesn't exist. You just proved my point.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 7:58 am to CommoDawg
Atheists are usually smarter than theists. Fits.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 8:00 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
evangelical athiests
This isn't a thing.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 8:00 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
I should have known that it would just be a vacuous debate led by evangelical athiests.
I thought both sides have been pretty good. Haven't really seen anyone trying to hook anyone else. Examples?
Page 11 of 21
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News