Hope you find this material useful. The way I look at it is the other way around: The burden of proof lies squarely on the person who denies such an obvious pro

Hope you find this material useful. The way I look at it is the other way around: The burden of proof lies squarely on the person who denies such an obvious proposition as (1). The same is true for similarly obvious propositions like "there is an external world which I can learn about through my senses" and "inductive reasoning is a valid way of attaining knowledge", which underpin the scientific enterprise and, moreover, any basis for critiquing (1) itself. One way to capture this is through the principle of phenomenal conservatism [1][2][3] as formulated by philosopher Michael Huemer. He has also written a book on the subject called Ethical Intuitionism. [1] https://philpapers.org/rec/HUEPCA https://philpapers.org/rec/HUEPCA [2] https://philpapers.org/rec/HUECPC https://philpapers.org/rec/HUECPC [3] https://www.iep.utm.edu/phen-con/ https://www.iep.utm.edu/phen-con/