🛡️ Debate Believers or skeptics

[Sonix]

@Harte , you are clearly not reading what is being written. This was the first and only post I had made to this thread and you are responding to it as if I have been in continual debate with you and you've accused me of dodging questions you have asked of others, not of me.
You asked earlier and repeated "If absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, exactly what would be evidence of absence? " and that is what my post was a response to. I made my point. Evidence of absence can only be found in the confidence of the thoroughness of the search in which no evidence was found - in exhausting the bucket, using the marble analogy. As we are talking about the practical world which is not an exhaustible bucket for any of us, as we are not omniscient, as plenty of phenomena are especially rare or subtle and we may not have sufficient preliminary understanding to know to look or how or where to look, it is more reasonable to remain undecided on some of these things than it is to suggest that because the anecdotal evidence has not yet met the criteria of evidence in the physical sciences then that is evidence of absence of the phenomena.

 

[Mayhem]

@Harte clearly seen your marbles are going.

 

[Kairos]

You have failed to respond to MY posts. Except to claim I used straw men, which you seemingly can't point out.
Here is what led me to point out that you don't seem to discriminate between evidence and proof:

Even a small survey of your marbles is certainly evidence of absence of red marbles. It is not to say that there are no red marbles in the bucket. It is to say that there is no evidence of red marbles in the bucket.

And finding a red marble (after a more thorough search) would not be evidence of a red marble in the bucket, it would be PROOF of a red marble in the bucket.

See, evidence and proof are separate ideas.

Harte

Going back to the bucket experiment, a sample of the marbles is definitely not evidence of absence. It can only be said, and this is if you know how many marbles are in the bucket, that your confidence there exist no red marbles increases with each fresh sample.

Not finding a red marble in a random sample is certainly not evidence there exist no red marbles. The only fact you have is that you failed to discover a red marble. It is only when you manage to examine 98-100% of the marbles that you can start making scientific assumptions about the existence of a red marble in the bucket.

And that is where your slogan fails reason. You have no idea how many "marbles are in the bucket" where it comes to these kinds of phenomenon. It's fine to not believe in something and to take a side. What's irrational is to claim something does not exist because nobody has shown you strict proof thereof. Of all the things we discovered in the universe, they didn't just spring into being as soon as we observed the phenomenon. LOL. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence is a fallacy. Self-evidently so.

 

[alpha centauri]

All religions from Catholic's, Christian's , Jewish, Muslim all talk about demons ghost's so for millions on people who experience the paranormal are all crazy, lier's?
So instead of telling believers to prove it is real, po it you money were your mouth is and prove It is not.

So any Skeptics how would you prove all the religions wrong and millions of people who went threw it and or still are, or people like me with abilities?????

Some sceptics experienced repression of religious beliefs, depending on where they live or have lived. So I would not be that hard. In my opinion, they cannot think right through propaganda over several years. They think, I am totally crazy.

I think, a great part of the religious people dont have that much experience with the paranormal. Some dont even believe that most of the miracles are possible that are in their religious books are caused by a magical being. Other people say oh I am Muslim, Christ etc. I must believe in this and that.

Some persons, I talked to, said these astral beings dont want to prove it on purpose. So a lot of being dont want that somebody knows for sure that those things exist. Furthermore other people say that they are not allowed to do it, because it is an astral law.

I would distinguish between militant sceptics and normal ones. The militants say I know for a fact that this does not exist. If you ask them to proof it, they get insulting or aggressive. The other ones say that they dont know. These ones usually want proof, too. That is ok.
But I am not someone, who feels obligated to give them proof.

If you experience something like that you have a proof for yourself, but not for others. I dont care if they have a proof of paranormal things or not. If they want a proof they have to search it for themselves or join a group that does it. They can also try to learn magical teachings as the purifying of their character (turn negative characteristics into positive), they can pray and hope for insight, they can meditate and so on.

 

[Harte]

Going back to the bucket experiment, a sample of the marbles is definitely not evidence of absence. It can only be said, and this is if you know how many marbles are in the bucket, that your confidence there exist no red marbles increases with each fresh sample.

Not finding a red marble in a random sample is certainly not evidence there exist no red marbles. The only fact you have is that you failed to discover a red marble. It is only when you manage to examine 98-100% of the marbles that you can start making scientific assumptions about the existence of a red marble in the bucket.

And that is where your slogan fails reason. You have no idea how many "marbles are in the bucket" where it comes to these kinds of phenomenon. It's fine to not believe in something and to take a side. What's irrational is to claim something does not exist because nobody has shown you strict proof thereof. Of all the things we discovered in the universe, they didn't just spring into being as soon as we observed the phenomenon. LOL. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence is a fallacy. Self-evidently so.

Apparently, you think that in political polls they ask every citizen the question.
Otherwise, you would know that sampling certainly IS evidence.
Or, maybe you're still confused about the difference between evidence and proof.

Harte

 

[Sonix]

@Harte , everything you find in your sample is evidence of presence of the type of thing you found in the greater set of things you sampled (because the sample is a subset of the greater set). Lack of something in your sample, however, is not evidence of lack of that thing other than being evidence of lack of it within your sample. If the logic were otherwise, if I couldn't be found in my house tomorrow that apparently would be evidence that I am nowhere. In fact, you can sample the entire world where I am not and you will not find me. That is not evidence of my non-existence.

 

[Harte]

So, the Inuit might have vacationed in South Florida.

Harte

 

[Harte]

@Harte , everything you find in your sample is evidence of presence of the type of thing you found in the greater set of things you sampled (because the sample is a subset of the greater set). Lack of something in your sample, however, is not evidence of lack of that thing other than being evidence of lack of it within your sample. If the logic were otherwise, if I couldn't be found in my house tomorrow that apparently would be evidence that I am nowhere. In fact, you can sample the entire world where I am not and you will not find me. That is not evidence of my non-existence.

No, it would definitely be evidence of your absence from your house though.
But, you could be hiding in the walls, so it's not proof.

Harte

 

[Sonix]

No, it would definitely be evidence of your absence from your house though.

This was exactly my point earlier. Any conclusion re evidence of absence is limited by the limits of your search. It provides no evidence of anything outside the limits of your search. And as said earlier, the world is not an exhaustible bucket, so there are some things/events, due to their subtlety or rarity or our lack of understanding about them, that it is reasonable to remain undecided about.

 

[Kairos]

Apparently, you think that in political polls they ask every citizen the question.
Otherwise, you would know that sampling certainly IS evidence.
Or, maybe you're still confused about the difference between evidence and proof.

Harte

Evidence of what, exactly? You are confounding different things here. Measuring an opinion's popularity in some demographic can be done with random sampling of that demographic.

What you are saying is something entirely different when you say absence of evidence is evidence of absence. You are saying that, because your random samplings did not turn up evidence of something, then that something does not exist. THAT is a fallacy and it's obviously wrong.

Sampling an opinion at about 10% prevalence in population, assuming you got the sampling and statistics right (a pretty big if these days, btw), is a completely different issue you are trying to conflate with your earlier fallacy.