Does lack of evidence work as evidence of lack, in this sense? [Spirituality & Religion]
So, here's my example (yes, I know, the unicorn example has been done to death but I find it's a great analogy):
So let's say I walk up to you and say, "Unicorns exist. Prove me wrong." Of course your initial response would be that you don't have to, which I'd say would be justified, but could this response also work?
"Well, think for a second. If unicorns were real, we would see its impact on the planet. We would find fossilized unicorn horns, unicorn footprints, etc. But we've scoured the planet looking for these types of evidence or impact, and found nothing. We have lived on this planet for around 200,000 years, in since our existence we have found no trace of verifiable evidence to prove the existence of such creatures. Therefore, unicorns don't exist."
Basically I'm thinking that perhaps absence can work as evidence of absence if there is no evidence where it counts, for example, someone says it rained two hours ago, and you check the roads. There's not a hint of moisture on them, and the sun is shining brightly. Therefore, it probably didn't rain.
Of course, there is still a possibility, but this hypothetically allows for a good probability of non-existence.
I'm posting this in the "Religion and Spirituality" section because I think this could work for the God question as well. Thanks in advance.
So let's say I walk up to you and say, "Unicorns exist. Prove me wrong." Of course your initial response would be that you don't have to, which I'd say would be justified, but could this response also work?
"Well, think for a second. If unicorns were real, we would see its impact on the planet. We would find fossilized unicorn horns, unicorn footprints, etc. But we've scoured the planet looking for these types of evidence or impact, and found nothing. We have lived on this planet for around 200,000 years, in since our existence we have found no trace of verifiable evidence to prove the existence of such creatures. Therefore, unicorns don't exist."
Basically I'm thinking that perhaps absence can work as evidence of absence if there is no evidence where it counts, for example, someone says it rained two hours ago, and you check the roads. There's not a hint of moisture on them, and the sun is shining brightly. Therefore, it probably didn't rain.
Of course, there is still a possibility, but this hypothetically allows for a good probability of non-existence.
I'm posting this in the "Religion and Spirituality" section because I think this could work for the God question as well. Thanks in advance.
