[did you miss the part where it's the positive assertation which has to prove itself?]
And did you miss the part where you've yet to prove that? You claim that a positive assertation must prove itself. Yet provide no proof that such is the case. And please don't insult us with some "self evident" argument.
31 comments
OK, I'll insult you some other way. You're a moron.
If the ones asserting the negative have the responsibility of proof, then every mindless assertion ever made must be considered true until proven false. Space aliens who look just like humans have taken over Sweden. Mars is a giant rock and dust covered onion. Bigfoot exists. You're an idiot. Well, that one has been pretty well wrapped up, I guess.
This is incredible. It's not enough that fundies redefine words in the language to win every time; now they're redefining the very rules of logic itself to maintain that "heads I win, tails you lose" position.
The final step, no doubt, will be the complete redefinition of reality itself, such that atheists, agnostics, pagans, Muslims, Jews, and all other faiths and sects will be redefined as "Christians" in order to claim ultimate victory in having converted everyone -- a masterstroke!
~David D.G.
Unfortunately, these kinds of word games can't be won by either side. The whole issue of religious verifiability has been beaten to death by people a lot smarter than Udsuna.
The philosopher John Wisdom told a parable of a garden that had been abandoned for years but appeared perfectly tended. One person said there was a gardener, while another insisted there wasn't. They gradually added more and more tests to discover the gardener's identity, but they all failed. The one who believed in the gardener gradually was forced to add more and more assumptions about the gardener to account for the negative results: the gardener must be invisible, intangible, undetectable, etc.; to the point where the gardener's existence was no longer verifiable by any earthly means. In the end, neither could conclusively prove the other wrong. But adding ad hoc assumptions certainly makes an argument less believable to an impartial judge. I suspect that nothing will change Udsuna's beliefs though.
did you miss the part where it's the positive assertation which has to prove itself?
And did you miss the part where you've yet to prove that?
Most people already know it. Very few people assume their opponents are such idiots that they don't know it.
You claim that a positive assertation must prove itself.
"The positve assertion must prove itself" is itself a positive assertion, yes.
Yet provide no proof that such is the case. And please don't insult us with some "self evident" argument.
No, no. You asked for evidence. I'll give it.
Suppose the burden of proof were placed on the negative position, rather than the positive assertion. Now suppose you meet two people, we'll call them Person A and Person B.
Person A says: "The planet Earth was created by God alone." This statement is unfalsifiable. Since we can't disprove it, we must accept it.
Person B says: "The planet Earth was created by an alien species called Renscellens. They had no help from anybody else." This statement is unfalsifiable too. Since we can't disprove it, we must accept it.
If we place the burden of proof upon the negative claim, we will be forced to accept mutually exclusive claims as true. Therefore, we cannot place the burden of proof on the negative.
Q.E.D.
Pointing out fallacies does not need to be considered insulting, it is always an opportunity to gracefully recognize mistakes or limitations and to learn. A temporary crisis may occur because of cognitive dissonance and the realization of having invested so much in vanity, though. I experienced that. But also, being on the defensive is compatible with persecution complex...
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.