|
|
Who's burden of proof is it?In a discussion with a Christian friend about the validity of The Bible, I made the claim that the bible has not met the burden of proof. This was his response... "You just made the claim that the Bible has not met the burden of proof, so prove your claim since you're allegedly about following the truth as you say.. Can you prove that absolute negative claim yes or no?" So who's burden of proof is it? |
| asked on Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:09:54 AM by Jad | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
I think you made the wrong statement. Rephrase it to "I don't believe [insert issue] because I have not seen sufficient evidence of its validity." Then your discussion partner bears the burden of proof to convince you. However, phrased the way you have it, you did make a claim and now you have to go through all the reasons you think the bible did not meet its burden of proof. The fallacy of trying to prove a negative. When you do not believe something and the other person does, I found it is a better discussion technique to ask the person where you missed the point and let them try to convince you. My experience is that if they are in error, they see the error of their ways or suffer cognitive dissonance. If they are correct, then you have learned something.
|
| answered on Tuesday, May 24, 2022 10:22:55 AM by Dr. Richard | |
Dr. Richard Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
|
|
Your friend asked you to prove that the Bible has not met the burden of proof, right? Well the proof is this: If your friend question that argument tell him that believing that the Bible is adequate proof for the existence of god would result in taking Spiderman #1 as adequate proof for the existence of Spiderman. (that's reductio ad absurdum by the way) So with that argument you have proven that Bible has not met the burden of proof. And now you should demand that THEY prove that the Bible has met the burden of proof. |
| answered on Tuesday, May 24, 2022 04:37:17 PM by Kostas Oikonomou | |
Kostas Oikonomou Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
|
|
This example brings up a lot of issues but two pertinent fallacies in the book (Dr Bo’s) are: proving non-existence and shifting of the burden of proof I don’t think claims about the Bible can be proven logically. People talk about having “faith”, which seems to be a way of saying—something may be true (and is true) even though it can’t be proven logically. And if it can’t be proven logically then logical fallacies don’t apply. Whether this is the ultimate truth, or a way of winning by saying the rules (of logic) do not apply, everyone will have to make up their own minds. |
|||
| answered on Tuesday, May 24, 2022 09:39:09 AM by Ed F | ||||
Ed F Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
| ||||
