Usenet
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
bullshitter@lemmy.ml to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml · 1 year ago

What scientific discoveries greatly weakened religion and the case of God ?

message-square
message-square
117
fedilink
1
message-square

What scientific discoveries greatly weakened religion and the case of God ?

bullshitter@lemmy.ml to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml · 1 year ago
message-square
117
fedilink
  • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nothing u cant prove a negative.

    • D61 [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean unfalsifiable claims right?

    • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      People should stop saying this.

      • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for demonstrating your complete lack of scientific literacy. This is how we get flat earthers and anti vaxxers.

        • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have an M.Sc

          • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well thats fucking concerning. Perhaps get the basics down before u start practising anything.

            • bazingabrain [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              lemm.ee user, checks out

              • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hey look at that hexbear has shown up to be anti science and anti logic because eliminating doublethink doesnt align with the communist tagline.

                • bazingabrain [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  bro go outside holy shit. ur not an anime protagonist, just a miserable nerd plugging in randome buzzwords to own some random guy online.

            • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              State your position calmly. What are you trying to say?

              • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Its a common, clear, and logic extension of the scientific process that you cannot prove a negative. I dont gets whats so complicated about this. Please since you are such an expert in the ways of calmly stating positions give me 1 single example of proving a negative with science.

                • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A woman menstruating proves the negative on her being pregnant.

                  • Didros@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    This reads very, “Well, I ask a four year old if they are a dragon they might say yes, and I know they are not a dragon!”

                    Yes, there are cases where information can lead you to an answer in a binary question. The more basic the question, the easier this is. But the more complex a problem becomes, the harder it is to disprove.

                    You can’t just say N doesn’t equal N(P) because it can’t. Prove it.

    • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes you absolutely can. Here’s an extremely trivial example: 6 is not prime, which I can prove by simply saying 6 = 2*3. Bam, I’ve proved a negative.

      • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        While proving that 6 is not prime illustrates proving a negative in math, the caution arises in complex, real-world scenarios of non well defined domains. Demonstrating absences beyond math’s clarity and definiteness can be challenging if not impossible to say the least.

        • HoChiMint [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are just repeating a myth. A quick look from wikipedia:

          Logicians and philosophers of logic reject the notion that it is intrinsically impossible to prove negative claims.[11][12][13][14][15][10][16][17] Philosophers Steven D. Hale and Stephen Law state that the phrase “you cannot prove a negative” is itself a negative claim that would not be true if it could be proven true.[10][18] Many negative claims can be rewritten into logically equivalent positive claims (for example, “No Jewish person was at the party” is logically equivalent to “Everyone at the party was a gentile”).[19] In formal logic and mathematics, the negation of a proposition can be proven using procedures such as modus tollens and reductio ad absurdum.[15][10] In empirical contexts (such as the evaluating the existence or nonexistence of unicorns), inductive reasoning is often used for establishing the plausibility of a claim based on observed evidence.[20][10][21] Though inductive reasoning may not provide absolute certainty about negative claims, this is only due to the nature of inductive reasoning; inductive reasoning provides proof from probability rather than certainty. Inductive reasoning also does not provide absolute certainty about positive claims.[19][10]

Asklemmy@lemmy.ml

asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !asklemmy@lemmy.ml

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

  • !lemmy_support@lemmy.ml
  • !fediverse@lemmy.ml
  • !selfhosted@lemmy.world

Looking for a community?

  • Lemmyverse: community search
  • sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
  • !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 204 users / day
  • 609 users / week
  • 2.25K users / month
  • 7.98K users / 6 months
  • 0 local subscribers
  • 49.1K subscribers
  • 5.36K Posts
  • 182K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • Evan@lemmy.ml
  • mekhos@lemmy.ml
  • tmpod@lemmy.pt
  • OrangeSlice@lemmy.ml
  • BE: 0.19.7
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org