• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is absence of evidence, evidence of absence?

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate

Attachments

  • datalaughingsmall.gif
    datalaughingsmall.gif
    1.3 MB · Views: 0

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Absence of evidence provides evidence of absence *when* the existence would be expected to provide evidence.

So, for example, if there was an elephant in my room, it would give evidence of its existence that was very clear (visual, olfactory, auditory, etc). So, for elephants in my room, the absence of evidence is very good evidence of absence.

Another example was the Michelson-Morley experiment. It was using the understanding of light at the time and predicted that they should be able to measure the motion of the Earth through the 'ether'. The amount and properties of this prediction were well within the technical abilities of the time. So, when the measurement turned out negative, it presaged a revolution in our understanding of space and time (relativity). In this case, again, absence of evidence *was* evidence of absence.

Now, if you have no idea where to look for evidence, or if the evidence would be difficult to find, or if there isn't any sort of evidence that would pick out your subject from everything else (background noise), *then* the absence of evidence would NOT be evidence of absence.

As an example, if you are looking to verify the existence of a particular, rare species and you don't know exactly where it lives, then a search may not turn up evidence of its existence.

The extent to which absence of evidence is evidence of absence strongly depends on whether we should expect evidence of existence fro our search.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes, but ONLY IN A CLOSED FIELD OF INQUIRY. Which means it does not apply to the vast majority of theistic god-concepts.

It doesn't have to be a *closed* area of study. It can be an area where we understand enough to know where to look and the properties we are looking for.

Which does not apply to the vast majority of theistic god-concepts.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
So, for example, if there was an elephant in my room, it would give evidence of its existence that was very clear (visual, olfactory, auditory, etc). So, for elephants in my room, the absence of evidence is very good evidence of absence.

Reminded me of this:

e5aeffd73d8cb6496cc81e5bc27ac081.jpg
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Can be.

Evidence is not proof though.
This is really important.
Some evidence is extremely weak, some extremely strong, with a huge range in between. Also, what constitutes strong or weak evidence is a matter of opinion. People often find evidence I think very weak extremely compelling, and vice versa.
Tom
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
I'm getting some great feedback and thoughtful replies. Thanks for the discussion!

Yes, but ONLY IN A CLOSED FIELD OF INQUIRY. Which means it does not apply to the vast majority of theistic god-concepts.

Agreeable, for the most part.

We'll take the deistic view of deities: There is a God out there that exists outside of the realm of spacetime who is responsible for creation. Now, we can search for evidence of such a god concept and find no evidence; but here, the lack of evidence is not evidence of absence.

But when we go to the realm of the theistic views of personal deities who interacts in the goings on of mankind, then that deity interacts with the natural world. In interacting with the natural world, within our view of observation and possible experimentation, it seems to me that this deity would inevitably leave evidence of its existence. So if we search for that evidence and find none, would that not place reasonable doubt on the existence of that deity in light of the absence of the evidence we would expect to see?

Thats a brain twister right there.

Break that down more?

Is it any clearer after recent posts, or do you still wish for clarification?
 
Top