- Joined
- Jul 17, 2020
- Messages
- 47,360
- Reaction score
- 26,058
- Location
- Springfield MO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
That's the claim fairly constantly made by Sherlock and the other theists, especially when challenged to come up with evidence for their particular "God". So let's take a little deeper look. The following information is from "Introduction to Philosophy", an online textbook by Philip A. Pecorino, Ph, D, Professor of Philosophy, Queensborough Community College, CUNY. The article is titled BURDEN OF PROOF and here are some of the key points:
"Most people as young children appear to have a “commonsense” understanding of the burden of proof. When young people hear a claim being made and it is, in their minds and experience, an extraordinary claim being made, quite often the response is one of asking for something to support the claim. The most common retorts are along the line of “Prove it”, “What makes you say that”, “Sow me” or something like “Oh, yeah?”. Somewhere along the way too many humans lose that sense and too often suspend their inclination to accept the principles underlying the “Burden of Proof”."
It would behoove those engaged in debate to forego the "prove it" bit in debate unless mathematics is the subject. Other than that, the key to support of any statement or entity is EVIDENCE. "Prove it" is more of a fifth grade taunt than it is serious debate.
"The burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist. It is a fallacy to claim that X exists unless you prove that there is no X. What is improper is for a person to claim that "X exists" and when asked to prove it, then the person who made the claim uses as a defense of "X exists" the next claim that no one has proven that X does not exist."
Sound familiar, theists?
Read the entire two paragraphs below, don't just stop after the last sentence of the first paragraph. The second follows the first for full understanding:
"If a person claims that X exists and is real then the burden is on that person to supply some support for that claim, some evidence or proof that others can and should examine before accepting it. It is incorrect to think that X exists and is real until someone can prove that there is no X. It is also wrong to think that just because you can not prove that X exists that does not mean that X does not exist and therefore X does exist.
Why is it that the burden is on the person who makes the claim? Well think whether or not it is a better way to proceed through life to accept anything and everything that people claim to be so. Experience should instruct every thinking human that there is a high probability that not everything that people claim to be true is actually true . Some claims might be made with the claimant aware that the claim is not true and some claims might be made with the claimant thinking that they are true but being mistaken (side note: that is Trump defined, especially the first phrase) . As it is for most humans not a very good idea to proceed through life based on beliefs that are false and thinking things to be true when they are not, most humans and those who would use reason to guide them will want some evidence and reasoning to support a claim being asserted to be true. So the burden is on those who make claims to offer reason and evidence in support of those claims."
Last sentence: SO THE BURDEN IS ON THOSE WHO MAKE CLAIMS TO OFFER REASON AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THOSE CLAIMS. Positive claims, that is.
So please, theists, acknowledge that the BURDEN OF PROOF is on you to show evidence for your God and not on the atheist to "prove" that there is no such entity.
For more: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/intro_text/chapter 3 religion/Burden-of-Proof.htm
Very interesting article and should be required reading for those interested in participating in RATIONAL debat
"Most people as young children appear to have a “commonsense” understanding of the burden of proof. When young people hear a claim being made and it is, in their minds and experience, an extraordinary claim being made, quite often the response is one of asking for something to support the claim. The most common retorts are along the line of “Prove it”, “What makes you say that”, “Sow me” or something like “Oh, yeah?”. Somewhere along the way too many humans lose that sense and too often suspend their inclination to accept the principles underlying the “Burden of Proof”."
It would behoove those engaged in debate to forego the "prove it" bit in debate unless mathematics is the subject. Other than that, the key to support of any statement or entity is EVIDENCE. "Prove it" is more of a fifth grade taunt than it is serious debate.
"The burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist. It is a fallacy to claim that X exists unless you prove that there is no X. What is improper is for a person to claim that "X exists" and when asked to prove it, then the person who made the claim uses as a defense of "X exists" the next claim that no one has proven that X does not exist."
Sound familiar, theists?
Read the entire two paragraphs below, don't just stop after the last sentence of the first paragraph. The second follows the first for full understanding:
"If a person claims that X exists and is real then the burden is on that person to supply some support for that claim, some evidence or proof that others can and should examine before accepting it. It is incorrect to think that X exists and is real until someone can prove that there is no X. It is also wrong to think that just because you can not prove that X exists that does not mean that X does not exist and therefore X does exist.
Why is it that the burden is on the person who makes the claim? Well think whether or not it is a better way to proceed through life to accept anything and everything that people claim to be so. Experience should instruct every thinking human that there is a high probability that not everything that people claim to be true is actually true . Some claims might be made with the claimant aware that the claim is not true and some claims might be made with the claimant thinking that they are true but being mistaken (side note: that is Trump defined, especially the first phrase) . As it is for most humans not a very good idea to proceed through life based on beliefs that are false and thinking things to be true when they are not, most humans and those who would use reason to guide them will want some evidence and reasoning to support a claim being asserted to be true. So the burden is on those who make claims to offer reason and evidence in support of those claims."
Last sentence: SO THE BURDEN IS ON THOSE WHO MAKE CLAIMS TO OFFER REASON AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THOSE CLAIMS. Positive claims, that is.
So please, theists, acknowledge that the BURDEN OF PROOF is on you to show evidence for your God and not on the atheist to "prove" that there is no such entity.
For more: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/intro_text/chapter 3 religion/Burden-of-Proof.htm
Very interesting article and should be required reading for those interested in participating in RATIONAL debat
