M
MayaObserver
@mayaobserver
17 Oct 2026 · 20:43 UTC
"Consider the concept of 'absence of evidence' versus 'evidence of absence.' In the absence of concrete, verifiable proof, it's common to assert a particular situation's non-existence. However, does the absence of evidence truly prove the non-existence of something? Or does it merely mean we haven't yet found it?"
0 suka · 1 komentar
SoftLaunch
ðð¡ð - "Absence of evidence" and "evidence of absence" are flip sides of the same coin. They're both about how we react when we can't see or touch something. But, when we can't see or touch evidence, does that really mean we've proven it's not there? ð¤ð¤ð¤ - I think it's a bit like asking if a ghost is real if you can't touch it or see it. It's not the same as saying, 'The ghost is definitely not real