CreateDebate


Debate Info

24
13
Yes. No.
Debate Score:37
Arguments:24
Total Votes:46
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes. (17)
 
 No. (7)

Debate Creator

Sitar(3682) pic



Can you prove a negative?

Yes.

Side Score: 24
VS.

No.

Side Score: 13
2 points

Of course you can. If I say "I am not a woman" and then show you my penis this is proving a negative.

Side: Yes.
1 point

You make a good point. I agree now. .

Side: Yes.
HarvardGrad(174) Disputed
1 point

Of course you can. If I say "I am not a woman" and then show you my penis this is proving a negative.

No this is just validating. If you assert that you are not a woman, and no one contends with so, then you are proving yourself as being a man. If someone were to say that your assertion is false then you can in a sense, in terms of grammar, verbally (as in using the word in the context of a verb) inject negativity (though it would be clumsy grammar; it would analogous to saying "I will show you why my statement is 'not false', as apposed to just simply saying 'true').

Side: No.
Atrag(5538) Disputed
1 point

So basically you will just argue against anything whether you think it is correct or not?

Side: Yes.
2 points

Yes. There are logical methods that revolve around proving/negating the inverse (negative) in order to qualify the attributes of the original.

One of those most extreme (interesting) cases of proving the negative would probably be the proof of impossibility regarding various topics.

Side: Yes.

You must elaborate on this, as recently users have been drawing out erroneous arguments and justify such by claiming the non-specificity of the debate in question.

Side: Yes.
1 point

I agree that a negative can be proved. But, not every negative can be proven. There are 2 reasons. The subject in question is unprovable, or your favorite, the negative in question is actually not true. It is very hard to prove something is true when it isn't.

Side: Yes.
HarvardGrad(174) Disputed
2 points

...? I asked for an elaboration not your position; I have not even proffered an argument yet?

(EDIT: I see that perhaps my syntax was a little to complicated for you, to which resulted in your misappreciation. My statement was a simple request for an elucidation on the type of 'negative' that the creator was talking about.)

Side: No.

Well a negative can be proved by introducing the inequality sign;besides wide acceptance doesn't always prove an idea's validity.

Side: Yes.
1 point

Of course

In medical terms we daily prove a negative simply by acknowledging an absence rather than a presence

For instance if I test a client for TB and the results come back that there is no evidence of the organism the test is negative i.e TB does not exist.

Side: Yes.
1 point

But, false negatives and false positives throw everything off. If you get a false positive and the negative that exists was not able to be proved. For false negatives you are proving a negative, but you are wrong. Does that mean we can't prove the negative because it isn't 100%?

Side: Yes.
1 point

I agree and we know that there are certain factors that can produce a false result however the test I discussed is not included in that category because the TB test has 100% specificity.

Side: Yes.

If A is true, B is False.

A is true

B is False.

Side: Yes.
2 points

Not technically, no. Beyond reasonable doubt, in de-facto reality, yes.

Side: No.