Tuesday, October 4, 2016

LOGIC. THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE. PT 2.


Chess, Pawn, King, Game, Tournament

Basically,  THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE IS THE RESULT OF THOSE WHO FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THAT PROPER REASONING SKILLS ARE NOT MEANT TO BE USED ONLY WHEN IT IS CONVENIENT, AND BACK UP THE ARGUMENT YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE.

THEY MUST BE USED CONSISTENTLY, AND IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES.

However, Many of those who find Themselves on the Losing End of a Debate, Discussion, or Argument, Resort to the Following:

When the Rules of LOGIC, THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND CRITICAL THINKING NO LONGER WORK IN YOUR FAVOR, AND THE OPPOSITION HAS MADE YOUR OPINION, CONCLUSION OR JUDGMENT INTO AN IRRATIONAL OR UNREASONABLE POSITION TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT, YOU ABANDON THEM, AND SOMETIMES THE RESULT IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS:

"MAYBE I CAN'T SHOW OR PROVE THAT MY CONCLUSION IS TRUE, OR EVEN REALISTIC, BUT YOU CAN'T PROVE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. THERE COULD BE EVIDENCE AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT, WHICH WOULD PROVE THAT WHAT I AM ASSERTING IS TRUE."

HOWEVER, YOU CANNOT PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH ELEMENTS OF THE MENTAL PROCESS THAT LEADS TO, AND ARE ESSENTIAL FOR, THE ABILITY TO USE AND UNDERSTAND VALID REASONING SKILLS.  IT IS AN ALL OR NOTHING PROPOSITION.
(These do not Include Arguments of Faith, Which by Their Very Nature, are Purely Subjective. These Beliefs are not Required to Meet the Standards of Proper Reasoning and Analysis, Unless They are being Used to Explain Events Occurring in the Physical or Natural World.)