Wednesday, October 5, 2016

LOGIC. THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE. PT 3.



The FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE is an Invalid Form of Argumentation, that is Popular with Certain Types of PSEUDOSCIENCE AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE.

WHY?  The Conclusions being Claimed as Factual by These Subject Categories Require the Use of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, and the Availability of PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND DATA so that they can be properly evaluated.  THIS WILL INDICATE THE TYPE OF RESEARCH METHODS USED TO SUPPORT ANY CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE, AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL STAND UP TO INTELLECTUAL SCRUTINY.

 
Loch Ness, Hole, Lake, Scotland, Nessie
LOCH NESS, SCOTLAND.


Unfortunately, for Those who believe in the CLAIMS OF TRUTH Advocated by The Proponents of PSEUDOSCIENCE AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE, THEY SELDOM MEET SUCH CRITERIA.  THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE IS A WAY AROUND THESE PROBLEMS.

As I have Asserted in other Articles, SCIENCE, LOGIC, AND CRITICAL THINKING ARE NOT PROCESSES THAT YOU CAN USE PART OF THE TIME, OR EVEN MOST OF THE TIME.  THEY MUST BE USED, AND THEIR RULES AND GUIDELINES FOLLOWED EXACTLY, OR YOU CANNOT TRUST, PROVE, OR VALIDATE CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE IN ANY FIELD.

HOWEVER, Before I go any Further with Examples OF THIS FALLACY, the Following must be Understood, for it is Often a Sticking Point that Creates Confusion when Discussing The Fallacy of Proving A Negative.

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

-  REQUIRING SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT INDICATES THE EXISTENCE OF A PHENOMENA, THAT MEETS THE RULES AND STANDARDS OF LOGIC AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, ONLY MEANS THAT A BURDEN OF PROOF MUST BE MET FOR IT TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS TRUE, PROBABLE, OR EVEN POSSIBLE BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.  

-  THIS IS NOT A DENIAL THAT THE PHENOMENA CANNOT OR DOES NOT EXIST,  BUT A JUDGMENT THAT SAYS THERE HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH A CONCLUSION.

THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FAITH AND FACT.