Why do people STILL think you can't prove a negative?

Question

It is true that SOME negative statements cannot be proven. But MOST negatives CAN be proven.

"It is widely believed that you can’t prove a negative. Some people even think that it is a law of logic—you can’t prove that Santa Claus, unicorns, the Loch Ness Monster, God, pink elephants, WMD in Iraq and Bigfoot don’t exist. This widespread belief is flatly, 100% wrong."

http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articles/proveanegative.html

"...the statement that “you cannot prove a negative” is simply false."

http://www.graveyardofthegods.net/articles/cantprovenegative.html

"I know the myth of "you can't prove a negative" circulates throughout the nontheist community, and it is good to dispel myths whenever we can."

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/theory.html

"A lot of people seem to buy into the belief that “you can’t prove a negative!” and use it in order to deflect criticism or to keep themselves from fulfilling the burden of proof on their position. In fact, this never fails to annoy me, because it’s most definitely not true that “you can’t prove a negative.”

http://francoistremblay.wordpress.com/2008/06/08/you-cant-prove-a-negative/

"I never want to hear that it is impossible to prove a negative again.

Anyone who does this will appear on a wall of shame."

http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/b3edb0fe572a354b

You may now apologize for thumbs-downing me every time I say it! You CAN prove a negative!

Answer 1

"It is widely believed that you can’t prove a negative. Some people even think that it is a law of logic—you can’t prove that Santa Claus, unicorns, the Loch Ness Monster, God, pink elephants, WMD in Iraq and Bigfoot don’t exist. This widespread belief is flatly, 100% wrong.">>

And would you mind explaining why you believe it is 100% wrong? You cannot prove that any of those things don't exist unless you are capable of being in all places at all times.

<<Five is not equal to four.">>

And we're talking about God, not mathematics. The Bible says that "spiritual things are spiritually discerned." I don't recall reading about anything spiritual in math class.

Answer 2

If we are speaking about science, science always (evidence based) deals with probabilities. You can say that a certain drug doesn't cause cancer by extensive experimentation or it can cause it. However, A positive claim holds more responsibility of evidence and you must at least find one detectable evidence of this positive claim, for example if you want to assert that this drug causes cancer, you must at least find one case of cancer associated with it and preclude all other factors. If this drug caused cancer in one or two patients having other problems that can cause cancer also, it is most probably that this cancer was not caused by this drug but other factors or problems, besides there would be no statistical significance to the hypothesis (This drug causes cancer) that it can be nullified. I say yes we can prove a negative. But when you say that God exists or something exists or has existed, science can't find one detectable evidence of so therefore it is most probably he doesn't exist thus the hypothesis of God existing is nullified until some evidence is present for his existence.

Answer 3

To prove a statement that makes a claim false, the only way to really do that is to prove a contradiction, making the claim logically invalid and thus completely false.

However, when a contradiction is pointed out in a religion, it is always explained away or the goal post is moved, making it virtually impossible to prove anything.

Additionally, a purely deist god is impossible to disprove because it makes absolutely no claims that can be tested.

The other method of proving a negative is basically this:

If God existed, there would be evidence. G -> E

There is no evidence. ~E

Therefore God does not exist.  ~G

Logically valid in all ways, but the assumption of no evidence would be contested, making this method useless.

Answer 4

cuz they dk God but I do and so do millions!

HES REAL....QUIT RANTING

Answer 5

I guess it depends on an individual's definition of "prove," and the negative statement in question.

Answer 6

I do wish that someone would tell my bank that it is impossible to prove a negative...

Answer 7

If it is possible to prove a negative, then kindly disprove the IPU to me

Answer 8

I agree you can prove a negative...you got my vote.

Answer 9

Nonsense. You are not proving anything, simply expressing an opinion.  In my opinion bigfoot exists and my evidence far outweighs your lack of evidence.

Answer 10

THANK YOU!  This statement "you can't prove a negative" drives me crazy every time I see it.  For everyone else, if you can't prove a negative, how do scientific hypotheses get falsified, hmmm?

Answer 11

Good points, Gemma.  Thank you for clearing up the fact that in some cases you absolutely can prove a negative, but in the context of proving the nonexistence of the christian god it is impossible to prove the negative statement.

EDIT:  On a side note, if a claim is made the one making the claim shoulders the burden of proof.  So a christian claiming the existence of their god must provide objective evidence to support the claim.  An atheist claiming that all gods are false must prove that claim as well.  The oft repeated statement that gods are the products of ignorant, primitive minds trying to assuage their fears of the natural world would have to prove that that statement was true.

As was pointed out in the links provided by Gemma, it all revolves around the manner in which the argument is presented and the claim is being made.

Answer 12

lol.....are you serious? you do sound serious. it's almost impossible for everyone to agree on something. by the way, where is the "wall of shame" located?

Answer 13

Just how do you propose to prove to me that there are no talking oak trees growing on any other planets in other solar systems that communicate telepathically with the fish here?

I can at least prove there are fish here, so I'm one up on you there. It MUST be true then.

Answer 14

All you have shown is a bunch of people who have given their opinions.  Are you relying on authoritative statements to define your truths?  That is a logistical fallacy in itself.  Simply stated, those who say that one can not prove a negative are simply and flatly wrong.  Prove it otherwise.  Opinion and authoritative statements are not proofs.

Answer 15

Of course.

"Prove there's no bogeyman in your closet."  All I have to do is open the closet door.

"Prove you're not drunk."  A breathalyzer or blood test can do this very objectively.

To prove a negative you have to have control over the context however.

The question about God is which category does it fit into -- the category of negatives that CAN be proven or the category of negatives that CANNOT be proven?

Is it possible to know in advance whether a given question falls into the category of negatives that can be proven or negatives that cannot be proven?

Answer 16

I see a lot of statements that you can prove a negative, but I don't see any proof that you can.

Why don't you demonstrate it for us?

Answer 17

Then disprove invisible pink unicorns and i'll stop giving you thumbs down.

Answer 18

Give me an example of a proof of a negative and I'll believe you.

Yes it is possible to prove some negatives, but giving an example is much more constructive than giving several paragraphs of anecdotes.

____

Answer 19

Yes, this is important. For instance, it has been shown that Jesus did not exist. (1) Someone claiming a negative has no burden of proof, however.

Answer 20

Only by getting into nit-picky little semantic arguments.

You are technically correct, since most people say "you can't prove a negative" when they REALLY mean "you are fallaciously shifting the burden of proof".  But in terms of the scope of YA, "you can't prove a negative is close enough.