"Evidence is merely, that which is convincing."
No
Side Score: 6
|
 |
Yes
Side Score: 12
|
|
|
|
|
If I recall correctly, and I do, you didn't use the word consider. www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Proofconsistsmerelyofwhatisconvincing. Different words, but means the same thing. But yes I admit. Side: Yes
Let me clarify.. My actual statement was: "Proof consists merely of that which is convincing" You misquoted me as saying "Evidence is merely that which is convincing" I don't know how you got sidetracked to thinking about my use of the word "consider" but its not as simple as a problem of memory if you don't notice that the FIRST word doesn't match. That you dropped my "consists" and replaced it with "is", didn't really bother me but your replacing "Proof" with "evidence" did. If you understand that the distinction between "evidence that constitutes proof" and "evidence that doesn't" is only how convincing the observer(s) find the evidence to be then I can't see why you take issue with my statement. Side: No
1
point
Lets say we assume this statement is true. So then, lets say we want to prove igneous rocks are made from cooled magma and/or cooled lava. Now a green turtle's existence is arguably as good for evidence that that's how volcanic rocks are formed as the lava from a volcano being observed cooling over a few years or scientific evidence that means it might take potentially millions into igneous rock. What you're saying is fucking crazy. At some point it is not a safe bet to use anything as evidence for anything or the whole argument for that thing as evidence falls down imo. Side: No
1
point
There is a reason why we can't just advise children "Only believe what's proven to be true" and send them on their way. There are statements that seem ( are evidently ) true, in light of how we intellectually process various kinds of evidence, but they can later be found false. Evidence can be purposely falsified and very convincing. If you think arranging your life according to "proven facts" is different than arranging it according to "how things seem" you are badly deluded. Convincing evidence = Proof My original statement was: "proof consists merely of that which is convincing". I will defend THAT statement NOT the misquote. ng Side: No
|
3
points
I believe it. If you tell a lie and enough people believe it they will then point to that lie and call it evidence. Example, the link of childhood vaccines to autism that Dr. Andrew Wakefield concluded. Even though he was outed as a fraud enough people are still convinced of his "evidence". Side: Yes
This is an interesting argument. "Evidence is merely, that which is convincing" When we look at the above, how many times have we seen court room attorneys say "we've gathered enough evidence to charge him" this would indicate they were convinced the evidence allowed them to take action. "Proof consists merely of that which is convincing" As I understand Proof vs Evidence. Proof mean doubt is gone, the evidences shows your finger prints on the rock thrown the the window and you were seen by a neighbor. What further intrigues me is someone pointing out "a lie as being convincing" I'm still wrestling with that. Is a lie evidence, is it proof and what happens when the lie is exposed? Side: Yes
Okay let's take this puppy a little further. A man is finally released from prison after about 15 years (it's been a while since this true story so the number might not be right) because 15 years earlier a young teenage girl said the baby she was carrying came from being raped by this guy. Now as a woman she tells the police she lied 15 years ago because if her parents knew she was having a baby by her boy friend they would have killed her. Maybe it's me but it looks like evidence and proof is found in this one lie? Side: Yes
This is entertaining Weigh the evidence! It almost seems if it weren't for Israel life wouldn't be quite as disturbed. How is it that 4000 years of these people who really didn't bring much on themselves historically, are the matter that brings trembling (OR TERROR!!!) To the door of EVERY Nation? Has Israel been a burden to lift? When lifting Israel have those Nations face Trembling, and being cut into pieces? And how did the Bible know Nations would lift Israel? What Nations back then lifted other Nations? Accurate prophesy? Crazy isn't it?? Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it… For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle (Zech 12:2-3, Zech 14:2-3 KJV).” https://www.christiancourier.com/ Prophetic Principles . Llet us remind ourselves of several principles that govern the validity of genuine prophecy. . True prophecies are stated emphatically; they are not couched in the jargon of contingency (unless, of course, contextual evidence suggests that one is dealing with a conditional prophecy). Generally, a significant time frame must lapse between the prophetic utterance and the fulfillment, so as to exclude the possibility of “educated speculation.” . The prophecy will involve specific details, not vague generalities. . The predictive declarations will be fulfilled precisely and completely. No mere substantial percentage will suffice. . One must recognize, though, that occasionally a prophecy may contain figurative terminology; this does not, however, militate against its evidential validity. Side: Yes
|
