Absence of proof is not proof of absence...agreed. But is absence of evidence not evidence of absence?

Personally i do think that an absence of evidence for something for which evidence is sought is indeed evidence of its absence. Not proof of its absence but evidence.

Example: The absence of concrete evidence of Bigfoot is at this point evidence that it does not exist. It's not proof that Bigfoot doesn't exist but the sheer lack of evidence seems to me itself to be disconfirming evidence.

What are your thoughts?

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

sspec

My thoughts are to let BigFoot remain a mythological creature only who do not need to get a special size of shoes made as his footwear.
Wud save upon energy, time n money resources for sure.

Pikachu

@sspec

lol a good point and well made.

sspec

@Pikachu Here, SW 🥾🥾 for you.

Pikachu

@sspec

CopperCicada · M

No. Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence.

A simple thought experiment. Don't look. Don't study. Don't test. You have maximized the absence of evidence. You have also maximized your inability to exclude any test hypothesis.

Pikachu

@CopperCicada

Well i did specify that this applies in cases where evidence has been sought.

CopperCicada · M

@Pikachu Well, that's a tricky caveat. Often seeking evidence is moot because we are looking in the wrong places in the wrong ways. The diversity of phenomena we can study in science is really very limited.

Pikachu

@CopperCicada

Well that could well be. Which is why i would consider absence of evidence to be evidence of absence but not proof. A provisional conclusion.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Pikachu

@jshm2

SW-User

Well depends what you truly consider evidence, some may say they have seen Bigfoot 😁 wouldn't that be an evidence? Witness.

Pikachu

@SW-User

What i consider evidence is that which can be corroborated and demonstrated.
In fact when it comes to bigfoot, the number of alleged sightings that cannot be corroborated by even a singe shred of objective evidence rather undermines the reliability of those accounts.

SW-User

@Pikachu mm and what about evidence that isn't found yet but will be found later on?. Then how could it mean that for sure absence of evidence is evidence of absence? Simply it hasn't found yet but has always been there... So nope, ir doesn't apply. Surely yes, sometimes there's no evidence at all, with or without our reach.
That's interesting about science that isn't set in stone and is often evolving

Pikachu

@SW-User

what about evidence that isn't found yet but will be found later on?.

That's why i make the distinction between evidence and proof.
It's a provisional assessment, not an absolute claim.

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

But is absence of absence proof of presence?

Or simply go with the old axiom, "You can't prove that something doesn't exist."?

Pikachu

@ChipmunkErnie

lol i think so...?

canusernamebemyusername · M

I don't think people realize the distinction between proof vs evidence. But I agree with this.

Pikachu

@canusernamebemyusername

They are often conflated, it's true.

GovanDUNNY · M

Leave Bigfoot where they live not bothering anyone ,alternative is they will all be locked up in some Zoo

Add a comment...