Shifting The Burden Of Proof, And Unfalsifiable Claims


Proving A Negative

Nobody has the burden to prove a negative in a debate, instead the onus is on the person making the positive assertion, because without evidence the negative assertion is the natural state. For example, Bob makes a positive assertion by saying, “Beyond the known universe exists a brick wall.” Leo makes a negative assertion by saying, “There is no evidence for this brick wall.” Even though it is a reasonable assumption, Leo has been careful not to assert there is no brick wall, because doing so puts him in the affirmative position. And if Bob were to suggest Leo needs to offer evidence that there is no brick wall, that would constitute shifting the burden of proof.

The Celestial Teapot

In the context of religious belief, “Russell’s teapot,” also called the “celestial teapot,” is an often cited quote by philosopher Bertrand Russell that illustrates this fallacy with an analogy.


Unfalsifiable Claims

Carl Sagan‘s “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is also often cited to refute positive assertions without proof. If you make a claim that something exists, you must offer evidence to support it. And if that claim is bold, straying far from the norm, the evidence should equal its boldness.

Occam’s razor suggests that the fewest assumptions is the starting point for a hypothesis. An unfalsifiable claim by its nature is unable to be proved or disproved. Just because Bob can exit rational discourse and conjure this “brick wall,” or cite ancient texts of ancestors who made similar claims, does not obligate Leo to disprove Bob’s fancy. Bob’s “brick wall” hypothesis is unfalsifiable, and because of that, there could be an infinite number of possibilities to explain its existence, but without a single one offering evidence, and that means the hypothesis that makes the least assumptions is the one that posits there is no evidence for the “brick wall.”

#assertion#Bertrand Russell#burden#Carl Sagan#celestial teapot#claim#evidence#logical fallacy#proof


  1. Burn the atheist - October 14, 2020 @ 3:35 pm

    1) You are challenging the status quo
    2) Belief in God is intuitive and a self evident truth
    3) Atheism itself poses a positive assertion in its essence, agnosticism doesnt

Leave a Reply