Description of Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:
Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).
Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
Jill: "What is your proof?"
Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."
Fallacy: Burden of Proof
Just thought this might help.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
Israel doesn't have nukes, either.
Last edited by MoSurveyor; 03-02-12 at 01:25 PM.
Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg
There's no question that Iran is funding, supplying and training anti-western/American interests in Iraq. I've no idea where Justabubba came up with "Hamas in Iraq"; discussion of Israel should be in the mideast section.
so, either provide proof of what you assert, or accept that you offer nothing to this debate other than unfounded opinion
If you want concrete proof of Iran-Hezbollah connection i'm sure theses public info of it on the CIA fact book
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
Last edited by xpiher; 03-03-12 at 06:31 PM.
Hayek - too liberal for republicans
The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labor. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.
-- George Orwell, 1984
Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb
NDAA was just broadcast via the internets megaphone to scare OWS, most of dat **** is already in the Patriot Acts. I did not get my daily dose of FEAR today, with scares of more war and false nuke threats in bold font headlines, designed to keep you little people in your place to paralyze you even though there is no nuclear threat. Which websites are not neocon/govnmnt megaphones? A day with more tabloid ****e and "celebs" , with a "news" media that treats Bachmann as a serious subject. Get out and protest people. OWS must grow! Ya know those millions at Obamas inaguration? Well what if the same people showed up in the Capitol again, but to forcibly remove, by the nape of the neck, those corrupt Senators and Reps from OUR buildings and we just take over?
Kane, are you serious? You simultaneously back OWS and Obama? Pull your head out man. OWS is supposed to hate the "BIG BANKS" yet you support a guy who bailed them out and has been the largest recipient of their campaign contributions. Please do some research before you let party trump principle.