Devil's Advocate #2

This episode of DA is a tad more cerebral.

-

DA #2: Existence and the Default Position

This topic may have links to my non-belief but leaving deities aside, I think it's a rather interesting topic of discussion. So here it goes.

I present to you one of my favourite logical arguments: Bertrand Russell's Teapot.

In a nutshell: If I told you that there was a teapot orbiting earth and further postulated that this teapot cannot be seen by any telescope known to mankind; would you believe me?

Most probably the answer would be no.

This line of logic is applied to the Loch Ness monster, Santa Claus, unicorns, "real" magic etc.

The question to be asked is Why? Why is it the most common answer to Russell's Teapot "No."?

It's probably because we are creatures of reason and logic. And that is why I argue that the default position for claiming the existence of something is one of non-existence.

Meaning, we do not believe schizophrenics when they claim that they are hearing voices in the night without evidence. Those voices, do not exist until proven.

This same reasoning applies to the criminally charged. As the old adage goes: Innocent until proven guilty.

One reason for this line of thought is the fact that it is illogical and impossible to prove a negative (of course in the context of absolutes, universality and objectivity).

For example, if I claim that there are unicorns in the world, it is my onus to prove it.

It is illogical for me to request OTHERS to prove that there are no unicorns to make the unicorns' existence legitimate.

How can you go about proving that there are NO unicorns? You can't.

But does that mean they exist? Of course not. It is the person who makes the claim who is responsible for justifying it.

However, this proving non-existence can be done under special limitations of course, for example, if I told you that there was a unicorn under my bed, you could very well prove that there wasn't one by looking under the bed.

But when it comes to the universal, absolute existence of anything, it is those who make the claim that have the responsibility in providing evidence for it to make the 'something' objectively existent.

I am obligated to present you substantial evidence for the existence of unicorns for them to be considered to have existed. Otherwise, I'm just the regular nutty, no different from those that believe vampires exist because Stephanie Meyer said so.

-

Agreed? Disagreed? Lemme know.