Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In 2007, Michael Kinsley observed in The New York Times that Hitchens was rather fond of applying Occam's razor to religious claims, [7] [b] and according to The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Melchior in 2017, the phrase "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" was "Christopher Hitchens's variation of Occam's ...
Hitchens' razor: That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. [5] Hume's guillotine: What ought to be cannot be deduced from what is; prescriptive claims cannot be derived solely from descriptive claims, and must depend on other prescriptions. "If the cause, assigned for any effect, be not sufficient to produce ...
This is also stated in Hitchens's razor, which declares that "what may be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence." Carl Sagan proposed a related criterion – "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" – which is known as the Sagan standard .
His epistemological razor, which states that "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" is still of mark in philosophy and law. [ 4 ] [ 5 ] Hitchens's political views evolved greatly throughout his life.
The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. 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.
And on the topic of crime, he asserted without evidence that “there’s hardly a downtown in America that’s actually safe to walk in.” (Crime is falling across the nation and is near ...
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (sometimes shortened to ECREE), [1] also known as the Sagan standard, is an aphorism popularized by science communicator Carl Sagan. He used the phrase in his 1979 book Broca's Brain and the 1980 television program Cosmos .
John Locke (1632–1704), the likely originator of the term.. Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), or appeal to ignorance, [a] is an informal fallacy where something is claimed to be true or false because of a lack of evidence to the contrary.