Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi, shortened from Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for its position.
The dictum appears in Hitchens's 2007 book God Is Not Great: How religion poisons everything. [3]: 150, 258 The term "Hitchens's razor" itself first appeared (as "Hitchens' razor") in an online forum in October 2007, and was used by atheist blogger Rixaeton in December 2010, and popularised by, among others, evolutionary biologist and atheist activist Jerry Coyne after Hitchens died in ...
Russell's teapot – Analogy formulated by Bertrand Russell to illustrate that the burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims; Occam's razor § Anti-razors; Zebra (medicine) – Exotic diagnosis in medicine which is usually unnecessary and wrong
Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others. Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion. [1]
Naturalistic fallacy fallacy is a type of argument from fallacy. Straw man fallacy – refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. [110] Texas sharpshooter fallacy – improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data. [111]
In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies , and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided ...
The ethical quandaries surrounding documentaries led me to Camilla Hall and Jennifer Tiexiera, the co-directors of our film Subject. They too were questioning where the documentary industry was ...
This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence. Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy. Specifically, it is an informal fallacy, which means that it relies on inductive reasoning in an argument to justify an assertion.