Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Carl Sagan proposed a related criterion – "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" – which is known as the Sagan standard. [ 2 ] While certain kinds of arguments, such as logical syllogisms , require mathematical or strictly logical proofs , the standard for evidence to meet the burden of proof is usually determined by context ...
Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor that serves as a general rule for rejecting certain knowledge claims. It states: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". [1] [2] [3] [a] The razor was created by and later named after author and journalist Christopher Hitchens.
But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. — Carl Sagan in his 1979 book Broca's Brain [ 4 ] The aphorism "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", according to psychologist Patrizio Tressoldi, "is at the heart of the scientific method , and a model for critical thinking , rational thought and skepticism everywhere".
A proof of impossibility or an evidence of absence argument are typical methods to fulfill the burden of proof for a negative claim. [ 13 ] [ 16 ] Philosopher Steven Hales argues that typically one can logically be as confident with the negation of an affirmation.
Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio) – assuming that a claim is true based on the absence of textual or spoken evidence from an authoritative source, or vice versa. [ 68 ] Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion, missing the point) – an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.
The Supreme Court weighs whether a Texas woman who served on a small-town council can pursue a retaliation claim after she was arrested following her criticisms of a senior official.
Arguments are typically structured by a claim being defended with reasoning and evidence. It typically consists of statements that provide premises to support a conclusion. In the case of appeal to the stone, there is an explicit conclusion but it is likely not substantiated with many premises to validate the conclusion being asserted.
The defense's argument was met with outright skepticism by the three-judge pane. Appeals court judges signaled Tuesday that they will likely reject Donald Trump's claims that he is immune from ...