D
?
G
no, but i cant prove it
D
A negative claim is a colloquialism for an affirmative claim that asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something.[10] The difference with a positive claim is that it takes only a single example to demonstrate such a positive assertion ("there is a chair in this room," requires pointing to a single chair), while the inability to give examples demonstrates that the speaker has not yet found or noticed examples rather than demonstrates that no examples exist (the negative claim that a species is extinct may be disproved by a single surviving example or proven with omniscience). The argument from ignorance is a logical fallacy. There can be multiple claims within a debate. Nevertheless, it has been said whoever makes a claim carries the burden of proof regardless of positive or negative content in the claim.
A negative claim may or may not exist as a counterpoint to a previous claim. A proof of impossibility or an evidence of absence argument are typical methods to fulfill the burden of proof for a negative claim.[10][11]
Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
When I say something must be eternal, I mean it is logically proven. And yes, when people reason like this, one can come to wrong conclusions. But that is because in that case one does not follow the rules of logic (which are completely infallible) to the point, and not that the rules of logic are wrong. If you get the wrong answer to a piece of math, it is because you have not followed the rules of mathematics well enough, not that the rules of mathematics are incorrect. It is not that the scientific method can correct anything within these domains (metaphysics and mathematics). It is a bit like saying that one has to measure all the sides of a right-angled triangle to "test" that Pytagoras' doctrine is actually correct.
Yes, it is possible. That phrase is a stupid fedora meme. Every positive proposition can be rephrased as a negative one.
Proofs, however, are only limited to the abstract worlds of mathematics and logic. Synthetic statements, no matter positive or negative, can never be proven. Even the simple fact that the external world exists isn't logically certain since it doesn't follow by definition like 1+1=2 or 'No married man is a bachelor'.
Proofs, however, are only limited to the abstract worlds of mathematics and logic. Synthetic statements, no matter positive or negative, can never be proven. Even the simple fact that the external world exists isn't logically certain since it doesn't follow by definition like 1+1=2 or 'No married man is a bachelor'.
D
true
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
