Reblogging this wonderful explanation for wally of ‘the burden of proof ‘ and why it’s intellectually and logically dishonest for people to ask you to prove that their god doesn’t exist. Enjoy. -kia
When any person makes a claim we have the right to ask for proof. Proof can come in many forms and what constitutes as acceptable varies from situation to situation. However, the burden of proof is always on the person(s) making the claim. If it were not this way we would open the floodgates to believing anything, no matter how absurd. This, in turn, can have dangerous results.
We could try to disprove a claim if we wanted to. If someone, for example, were to claim leprechauns exist we might cite lack of evidence or show that show that leprechauns have only ever appeared in works of fiction. However, is not up to us prove their non-existence and we can rightfully dismiss it until the claimant shows us acceptable proof.
Proving a negative
When a person says something like ‘you can’t prove leprechauns don’t exist’, they are asking you to…
View original post 304 more words