On Aug 29, 9:42 pm, ernie...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Ernie Primeau) wrote:
> If asshole farrel could prove that my method does not work she would >
do so instead of posting bull**** using my name. Ernie
from
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/pecorip/scccweb/etexts/phil_of_religion_text/chapter_5_arguments_experience/burden-of-proof.htm
****fting the Burden of Proof
The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or
proposition. ****fting the burden of proof, a special case of
'argumentum ad ignorantium,' is the fallacy of putting the burden of
proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion being made.
The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true
unless proven otherwise.
Also see:
Negative Proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
Negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the
negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form:
"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."
It is asserted that a proposition is true, only because it has not
been proven false. The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the
debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following
form:
"A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that
it does not exist".
However, the fallacy can also occur when the predicate of a subject is
denied:
"A supernatural force must not exist, because there is no proof
that it does exist."
"Scientists don't know for sure what natural forces caused the
first single-cell life, so it must be intelligent design."
|
