• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Burden of proof

R

Random

Well-Known Member
doppelgänger;1064998 said:
The proof is in the pudding.
Click to expand...

Old Irish expression! Frubals! :p:yes:

Edit. Won't let me frubal you, Bren. Furbals when I get them, K? Sorry...
 
D

Dislekseyuh

Member
Azakel said:
I have a question, why does there have to be a Burden of proof put out there for Theist. I have seen Atheist on here saying that we Theist have the Burden of proof on us and we HAVE to prove what we believe is real, real. Way though? Real I don't have to prove anything to anyone(nor do I care to) so why do I have the Burden of proof on me just because I'm a Theist. Now I don't believe that Atheist should have it ether, but some time I think that they should, or that even should at time, if there making clam and just get spouting out you they are wrong and there right and blah blah. Yes you can't prove God(s) exist but you also can't disprove they exist ether. What's the saying, "No evidence does not mean non-existence". ^_^
Click to expand...

There is an actual, full-sized, orange unicorn standing here next to me. It has magical powers, and uses them to do amazing things. I cannot get any pictures of it, nor show you that it's here. I cannot get any sounds from it. I could photoshop an orange unicorn into a picture with me, but I can't actually show you that it's here. I can't even put on the web cam and show you it's awesome magical powers. Since you cannot disprove that the magical unicorn isn't actually here then there must be at least a 50/50 chance that it does.
 
Azakel

Azakel

Liebe ist für alle da
Dislekseyuh said:
There is an actual, full-sized, orange unicorn standing here next to me. It has magical powers, and uses them to do amazing things. I cannot get any pictures of it, nor show you that it's here. I cannot get any sounds from it. I could photoshop an orange unicorn into a picture with me, but I can't actually show you that it's here. I can't even put on the web cam and show you it's awesome magical powers. Since you cannot disprove that the magical unicorn isn't actually here then there must be at least a 50/50 chance that it does.
Click to expand...

See I understand that, and to me as long as you want to believe it that's all good. My real point is when people start to push what the believe is real down one throat that that will will say prove it. But if some one just tell me what they believe like you did, and is not trying to tell me I too have to believe it, I can't see why BoP has to be used.
 
Popeyesays

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
The Soviet Union required proof of innocence. Japanese jurisprudence has often been accused of requiring proof of innocence.

Regards,
Scott
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
Popeyesays said:
The Soviet Union required proof of innocence. Japanese jurisprudence has often been accused of requiring proof of innocence.

Regards,
Scott
Click to expand...

Proof of innocence is required in many legal areas. The authority must have reasonable justification for saying that you are guilty, or could be proven guilty, and it is your job to refute that.

Take parking fines, for example.
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
The best reasoning that I can come up with to suport the idea of burden of proof (I came up with it myself) is that when we first hear about an idea, we do not believe it. We need to have some evidence and explanation to support it, before we change and formulate our own opinion.

The burden of proof arises when one person wants to demonstrate the validity of an idea to another person who either has not heard of the idea before, or has heard of it, and does not believe. After all, the evidence that the supporter has received to formulate their opinions (no matter how subjective or personal the evidence was) received the information in some manner to allow them to make up their own mind.
 
Fluffy

Fluffy

A fool
There is an actual, full-sized, orange unicorn standing here next to me. It has magical powers, and uses them to do amazing things. I cannot get any pictures of it, nor show you that it's here. I cannot get any sounds from it. I could photoshop an orange unicorn into a picture with me, but I can't actually show you that it's here. I can't even put on the web cam and show you it's awesome magical powers. Since you cannot disprove that the magical unicorn isn't actually here then there must be at least a 50/50 chance that it does.
Click to expand...

That is a strawman. We are not saying that the chance of God existing is 50/50 because its existence cannot be disproved. We are saying that the burden of proof does not fall on those who assert the existence of God. It falls on anybody who is interested in the existence of God.
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
Fluffy said:
That is a strawman. We are not saying that the chance of God existing is 50/50 because its existence cannot be disproved. We are saying that the burden of proof does not fall on those who assert the existence of God. It falls on anybody who is interested in the existence of God.
Click to expand...

I would say it falls on those that wish to assert the existence of God to an unbeliever.
 
Popeyesays

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
rojse said:
I would say it falls on those that wish to assert the existence of God to an unbeliever.
Click to expand...

Or anyone who wishes to dis prove the existence of God to a believer.

The thing I find most amusing about evangelical atheism is that the proponents of that branch of the "church" do not understand they are doing everything they say the hate about believers.

Regards,

Scott
 
D

Dislekseyuh

Member
Azakel said:
I understand this. But that still doesn't stop people from putting all people into the same group.
Click to expand...

Thing with a lot of atheists is that they want you to prove God when the said theist is pushing God down their throat. Other than that most of us don't really care at all.
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
Popeyesays said:
Or anyone who wishes to dis prove the existence of God to a believer.

The thing I find most amusing about evangelical atheism is that the proponents of that branch of the "church" do not understand they are doing everything they say the hate about believers.

Regards,

Scott
Click to expand...

I am trying very hard to explain this idea, and it seems that it is not working. Another attempt, then.

The default position of someone on a concept when they initially hear it is skepticism. The person needs some sort of evidence to make them believe. You received some evidence in regards to God, which allows you to believe, while atheists have not.

Therefore, with the benefit of the extra information you have, you should try and persuade those that do not have your knowledge as to the plausibility of your ideas. Sure, I can argue against your ideas. However, it is much more difficult to argue the absence of something than the evidence of the existence of something, and this proves nothing to you, as you have the benefit of coming from this skeptical position to a position of belief through either experience or reasoning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top