View Single Post
Old 03-04-09, 12:06 PM   #19
Letum
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: York - UK
Posts: 6,079
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramike
You said it: you can't prove a negative. So why bother?
"Negatives do not require proof"
is a little closer to the mark than "you can't prove a negative".

Rather than:
1) 'E' has not been proved
2) Thus 'E' is false

We should say:

1) 'E' should be considered true if (and only if) proved
2) 'E' has not been proved
__________________
Letum is offline   Reply With Quote