AVA Main Directory | Resource Links | Event Calendar | Vampirism Research Study | Archived AVA Forum v1.0





Atlanta Vampire Alliance [AVA]
User Info
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 20, 2019, 09:49:50 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search

Key Stats
19897 Posts in 2603 Topics by 1004 Members
Latest Member: DragonBLood
Home Help Arcade Login Register
Atlanta Vampire Alliance [AVA]  |  Religion, Spirituality, & Philosophy  |  Other Religious, Spiritual, & Philosophical Paradigms (Moderators: Merticus, SoulSplat, Eclecta, Maloryn, Zero)  |  What Is "Proof"? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: What Is "Proof"?  (Read 4223 times)
The Sentinel
Level 4 Contributor
****
Gender: Female
Posts: 127


The Thread Zombie


WWW
« on: August 13, 2010, 10:55:09 pm »

We've had a lot of arguing about there being proof vs. there not being proof so I have to bring up the thought... what is "proof"? Is there a single, universally defined "THIS IS PROOF"? I don't think there is. What proves something to one person absolutely wouldn't to another and does that make one person a moron and one not? Again, I don't think so.

Is "proof" science? And why would science be proof? Does it really know more than everyone else? A lot of science is just theory, to be frank. Einstein's THEORIES are just that. The Big Bang THEORY, and so on. Is that to say they're wrong or bad? No, but they don't have "proof" either. Does that make them as suspect as faith and personal experience? Moreso? Less so?

Science was really pushed forward in the 1500s, during the Renaissance it was really begun after a very long hiatus since the Greeks in the BC's. There were great scientists then, of course, but they weren't quite ready to tackle whether or not there was a God. In fact, they were quite religious, I believe.

This divorce between Science and Religion is very recent and there are many people that are starting to bring them back together. Stephen Hawking, one of the world's most famous and prominent scientists is a very religious man and believes fully that God exists. I say God because he is Christian, but the divine, something bigger than we are, whatever it may be. So what is to say that science and religion have to be at odds? Science is starting to explore the power of the human mind and there are already games being made - literal games you can purchase for children - that employ these new technologies and they operate purely on thought and will alone. With that in mind, what is to prevent science from proving other things it does not yet have the tools to do so?

So what is proof? I understand that it will be different for everyone, but I just felt that it might be a good idea to throw it out there because everyone's talking about what is and isn't "proven" these days.
Logged

A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.
-- Alexander Pope, Unknown , 1688-1744

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
-- Heinlein's Razor
paindancer
Level 5 Contributor
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 955



« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2010, 11:10:33 pm »

Well that depends on if you are talking and personal proof or proof for the masses.

Proof at large, to convince the public so to speak revolves around the scientific method.. focusing on repeatable results.  A + B = C sort of thing.  Technically there is a difference between theory and proof.

Personally, it is all subjective.  Personal proof may be gut instinct or may be physical experiment.  What is proof for one, may not be for another.

Logged

Paindancer
Advocating sensible vampirism since 2006
RKCoon
*
Level 5 Contributor
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 460



« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2010, 12:19:03 am »

Being in that my professional career (Automotive Service Tech) relies on me to be able to prove what I say and do, Proof is strictly a logical, rational explanation that can be duplicated and demonstrated. If I say, to my warranty office, that X part is NFG, I better be able to prove it, or the shop I work at gets billed for the part, and it makes my boss very unhappy.  That means knowing test procedures, measuring devices, etc, all to show without doubt that yes, X part is ratched.

Funny thing is, when I take that very same logical, rational method and apply it to things like kin or religion, yea, I very quickly do a WTF, over. In relation to that, Sentinel, I did a quick wiki search on Stephen Hawking (as I was quite surprised to hear Hawking called a Christian), finding it to list him as agnostic, Not a christian. Not satisfied with Wiki, I checked the site in the man's name, which makes no mention of his faith/lack thereof, nor did two other sites I checked, sooo yea that really doesnt do you many favors to say things like that. In fact, the man has spoken out countering the belief of god  -- <a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/I4I-XT5nH7g" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/I4I-XT5nH7g</a>  (Ironically posted by a christian YT user, complaining in the remark below that Hawking does not believe in jesus)


Its comments like these that quickly destroy any credibility people of faith, or more precisely, people of religious faith try to push - they cannot get basic facts correct, yet would presume to "know and preach the truth" - How can anyone that thinks with a rational mind, pauses to examine what is placed before them, and seeks not only the truth, but to understand the truth and how/why it works, how can anyone like this put any credibility into those of faith? 

Short answer is, we dont. Hence, we seek proof, tangible, solid, duplicatable, repeatable proof. That is also why theories are made - AND, if proven wrong (I note how quickly religious types gloss over this part) the theories are changed or discarded as new information is made available. We dont understand, we dont claim to understand, we hypothesize about whatever topic is at hand based on what we do know, and we learn and grow from there. We are not content to read one book and claim to know the meaning of life; we seek to prove it. Or, Disprove it.
Logged

Automotive Necromancer
Darklilone
Level 5 Contributor
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 260


Amelia Nightside


WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2010, 04:13:43 pm »

Being in that my professional career (Automotive Service Tech) relies on me to be able to prove what I say and do, Proof is strictly a logical, rational explanation that can be duplicated and demonstrated. If I say, to my warranty office, that X part is NFG, I better be able to prove it, or the shop I work at gets billed for the part, and it makes my boss very unhappy.  That means knowing test procedures, measuring devices, etc, all to show without doubt that yes, X part is ratched.

Funny thing is, when I take that very same logical, rational method and apply it to things like kin or religion,

But you're taking a Machine, and comparing it to human thought, believe, or whatever.
Each individual is different, we're not made(or come to being in whatever way) like parts for a car, that are mass produced.
You can't exactly apply the same logic. Everyone is different. Everyone is effected differently by things.
Like the flu, sure you have typical symptoms, but not everyone is going to experience ALL of the symptoms, nor are they going to get hit as hard with said symptoms. Same goes with belief.
Whether energy or psy/psi/pranic anything or even vampirism actually exists, though there may be typical symptoms (that some believe might already believe in) but we haven't fully (to my knowledge) concluded as to what they are, and there are so many individuals who are involved and claim to have this condition.
so many who claim to be kin of some sort, and then think of the many different KINDS of kin one could claim to be.
and so many different religions, yes created by people.
i believe it' spossible that a true religion may have existed once.. but i also understand, and so believe, that the specific religion does not exist anymore.. that or it's just so hard to find, because anyone can create a religion nowadays it seems. they pick and choose what they want, what makes them feel better, even if it's not the truth or whatever.

While proof is good for anything, as my psychology teacher in high school demonstrated with a chair on top of a desk, everyone had a different perspective, there is NO single WHOLE truth, but many variations of that same truth.

Logged
SoulSplat
House AVA Founder
House AVA Member
Level 5 Contributor
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1344



« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2010, 11:19:46 pm »

We've had a lot of arguing about there being proof vs. there not being proof so I have to bring up the thought... what is "proof"? Is there a single, universally defined "THIS IS PROOF"? I don't think there is. What proves something to one person absolutely wouldn't to another and does that make one person a moron and one not? Again, I don't think so.

Actualy, from what I've read (from the recent goings on) is not a matter of proof vs. no proof. Its more a discussion of proof versus faith.

While one side believes in the scientific side:
Fact can only be an event that can be replicated over and over again under the exact same parameters

The other side believes in faith:
Personal feelings become a factor. If you have felt outside influences (smell, taste, sound), they must also be a variable.

It's funny that I used the word "faith". Is that relavent? WHY IS IT SCIENCE VS. WHAT GOES ON INSIDE A PERSON? Isn't that weird?

Enough babble, But I'll post it anyway.
Logged

If you've found this site helpful, consider using the donate button to reciprocate the effort.

--SoulSplat
House AVA Founding Member
Forum Moderator
The Sentinel
Level 4 Contributor
****
Gender: Female
Posts: 127


The Thread Zombie


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2010, 08:18:32 am »

I understand that there's been a lot of "science" vs. "faith" lately, though that's not quite what I'm getting at. Proof to one person isn't proof to another. What may prove or validate one person's experiences may be entirely inadmissible to another person as "proof". That's more the point I am trying to drive at - I am asking everyone what they thing proof is. I'm not saying "proof of anything" I'm playing Plato here and asking people a very open-ended question in an attempt to get them to evaluate what, to them, defines proof.

Proof differs between people and what everyone constitutes as "proof" of something might, in fact, be entirely bumpkis. A lot of people claim that proof is seeing it with their own eyes - but there are illusionists out there (like Criss Angel) who have followings of people that believe that they're the real deal simply because they are that good at illusion (do you have any idea how many metaphysicisits I've had to slap down for thinking that Criss Angel is the real deal?). Proof is elusive, much like truth.

"Truth" is different in many societies. There is "The Truth" as put forth by Plato (believing there is a singular, ultimate truth about everything) and then there is "A Truth" which is something that may be true for one person and not another. For example, if someone were to ask me, "What is the weather outside?" I would tell them it is cloudy. What I am not saying is that it is pouring. Did I lie? No. Not at all. But I didn't tell "THE TRUTH" (Platonically speaking) either. I told a truth - it is cloudy outside - but I didn't encompass the whole of the situation.

It's this dissection of what is "proof" and "THE TRUTH" vs. what is "proof" and "a truth" depending on viewpoint, personal bent, belief, and so on that I have been getting at with this question. It's a philosophical question that I'm not expecting a definitive answer to but more want to evoke thought with.
Logged

A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.
-- Alexander Pope, Unknown , 1688-1744

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
-- Heinlein's Razor
arcane
Level 3 Contributor
***
Gender: Male
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2010, 09:15:18 am »

In terms of energy working, proof is demonstration in different ways, with independent verification. And repeating demonstrations various ways until satisfaction is achieved for all parties.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Copyright 2005-2012 | Atlanta Vampire Alliance | All Rights Reserved
Theme By Nesianstyles | Buttons By Andrea | Modified By Merticus