3 ms·
The reason burden of proof is on the person making the argument is that it is trivial to come up with arguments that are not falsifiable. And for any non-falsif
by TomMckenny 8y ago
The reason burden of proof is on the person making the argument is that it is trivial to come up with arguments that are not falsifiable. And for any non-falsifiable claim you can make a contradictory non-falsifiable claim.
So if you can accurately say of some claim "there is no evidence of that" then the claim is completely refuted. Thus asking for evidence is a polite way of pointing out when something is completely made up.
Sure, if someone makes a claim that is widely established, like climate change or natural selection, then of course some rando on the web asking for yet more evidence is probably trying to derail the conversation.
But if a claim is not widely established, like intelligent design, then a request for evidence is perfectly reasonable. There can be no a-priori convincing counter argument without referring to facts in the real world. Indeed, almost not claim is refutable a-priori without real world facts.
So given an unreasonable and unsupported claim on the internet I suppose we can 1) assume the poster is a troll and ignore them or 2) assume they and the audience are genuine and point out their statement is unsupported and therefore false. Whether one actually wants to go around correcting people being wrong in the Internet is another question. But a guy's gotta procrastinate somehow.
- austincheney 8y agoThis isn't law. This isn't a scientific journal or theory of medicine. It is commentary on the internet. If there is an unsubstantiated claim you have two good faith choices: 1. Ignore it. 2. If, and only if, you are actually interested in exploring the comment deeper than ask a proper question kindly probing for specificity or help with understanding. There is some false notion that assertions must be proven. It is commentary on the internet. If you really REALLY want it proven, in the spirit of science, you will independently attempt to reproduce the experiment or research.
- davvolun 8y ago> ask a proper question kindly probing for specificity or help with understanding "Can you back up your statement with a source" is insufficient? > in the spirit of science, you will independently attempt to reproduce the experiment or research In the spirit of science, I need to know your prior assumptions, sources, previous work in the area, ... I get where you're coming from, but I need to know your starting point, otherwise we're as likely as not to be arguing past each other. I absolutely disagree that those are your only "good faith" choices -- like I implied above, before I'm going to get deeply involved in a discussion with some random person on the internet, I need to know that you're coming from a good faith place too.
- jeremysmyth 8y agoWhat if an unsupported claim is actually harmful to society, if believed? 15% of people believe the US government was responsible for the 9/11 attacks[1]. 42% of Britons believe that the UK sends £350M a week to the EU[2]. If voters make decisions based on such beliefs, I'd expect material damage to democracy. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_conspiracy_theories https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_con... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-brexit-lies-eu-pay-money-remain-poll-boris-johnson-a8603646.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-br...