I Believe In Werewolves
Why Werewolves Can Exist... The majority of people don't believe in werewolves. However, after multiple years of research, I've come up with two simple concepts that prove one cannot say werewolves don't exist, at least not if they want to be taken seriously. It may not prove werewolves exist, but it makes any evidence to the contrary invalid.
First, The Debunking Paradox:
"There are those who wish to try and prove that certain things (creatures, ob<x>jects or concepts) are or are not possible. In the case of creatures and ob<x>jects, one would be trying to prove that it does or does not exist. While, because of the Universe Example, trying to prove something impossible or nonexistent would be incredibly difficult, there are still those who may try to prove their beliefs. However, there is a brick wall that cannot be passed while trying to do so. The paradox of trying to prove something impossible or nonexistent is that the only way you could know what to disprove is if the creature, ob<x>ject, or concept existed. Were this the case, the entire argument that it is impossible or nonexistent would become pointless. For example, in the case of werewolves, one could try to prove whether or not the full moon can cause any being to physically transform into another shape. The modern belief is that the full moon causes werewolves to transform. Therefore, this person makes the assumption that, if they can prove the moon cannot cause such a transformation, then werewolves cannot exist. However, this is assuming that, if werewolves existed, the full moon is the actual cause of their ability to shift. The key phrase in the past sentence is “if werewolves existed”. What if the full moon has nothing to do with the transformation? This is a possibility and, if there is more than one possibility, then we cannot say one is right over the other. The only way we could know whether or not the full moon has anything to do with werewolves transforming is if they existed. If they existed, as said before, it would be pointless to try and state that they didn’t. In the end, the only thing the person would prove is whether or not the full moon can cause a being to transform. And even if they prove that it can, there’s still no guarantee that it applies to werewolves. Every story before Hollywood came into the picture says nothing about the full moon causing the transformation. Therefore, again, we cannot know whether or not the full moon has any sway on a werewolf unless werewolves existed. In summary, it is pointless to try and prove something impossible or nonexistent because of this paradox."
Second, the "Universe Example", which basically states that, because we cannot prove that something existing on this planet doesn't exist on others (yes, it sounds weird), we cannot say that the thing doesn't exist until we search every planet in the universe. Essentially, we can't say something is impossible or nonexistent until we've searched the entire universe and found no evidence of that thing's existence.
It's difficult to describe these concepts, but they are all that's necessary to debunk all claims that werewolves don't exist.
First, The Debunking Paradox:
"There are those who wish to try and prove that certain things (creatures, ob<x>jects or concepts) are or are not possible. In the case of creatures and ob<x>jects, one would be trying to prove that it does or does not exist. While, because of the Universe Example, trying to prove something impossible or nonexistent would be incredibly difficult, there are still those who may try to prove their beliefs. However, there is a brick wall that cannot be passed while trying to do so. The paradox of trying to prove something impossible or nonexistent is that the only way you could know what to disprove is if the creature, ob<x>ject, or concept existed. Were this the case, the entire argument that it is impossible or nonexistent would become pointless. For example, in the case of werewolves, one could try to prove whether or not the full moon can cause any being to physically transform into another shape. The modern belief is that the full moon causes werewolves to transform. Therefore, this person makes the assumption that, if they can prove the moon cannot cause such a transformation, then werewolves cannot exist. However, this is assuming that, if werewolves existed, the full moon is the actual cause of their ability to shift. The key phrase in the past sentence is “if werewolves existed”. What if the full moon has nothing to do with the transformation? This is a possibility and, if there is more than one possibility, then we cannot say one is right over the other. The only way we could know whether or not the full moon has anything to do with werewolves transforming is if they existed. If they existed, as said before, it would be pointless to try and state that they didn’t. In the end, the only thing the person would prove is whether or not the full moon can cause a being to transform. And even if they prove that it can, there’s still no guarantee that it applies to werewolves. Every story before Hollywood came into the picture says nothing about the full moon causing the transformation. Therefore, again, we cannot know whether or not the full moon has any sway on a werewolf unless werewolves existed. In summary, it is pointless to try and prove something impossible or nonexistent because of this paradox."
Second, the "Universe Example", which basically states that, because we cannot prove that something existing on this planet doesn't exist on others (yes, it sounds weird), we cannot say that the thing doesn't exist until we search every planet in the universe. Essentially, we can't say something is impossible or nonexistent until we've searched the entire universe and found no evidence of that thing's existence.
It's difficult to describe these concepts, but they are all that's necessary to debunk all claims that werewolves don't exist.
31-35, M
