Talk:Shifting the burden of proof
on 7 January 2009 was this sentence deleted:
"However, if a strong atheist makes the positive claim that no gods exist, then he or she has the burden of proving this claim. "
and isn´t "A theist is someone who claims that there is a god." a bit incorrect?
I would propose something like the following:
"A (gnostic) theist who claims that there is a god has the burden of proof. An (gnostic) atheist who claims that there is no god has the burden of proof too. While the Agnostic theist/atheist would not claim anything in the first place, so they don´t have the burden of proof in a discussion"
But maybe I am just missing the point here, because I don´t understand what the "positive claim" means??? (I am german and basicly only understand the word positive and claim but not the combination)
- A "positive claim" in this context is an assertion. Whether someone is saying that god does exist or that god does not exist, he is making an assertion.
- I think it's important to note that the philosophic burden of proof is on the person whose position is contrary to what has already been established (i.e. conventional wisdom). In a debate setting, who has the higher burden of proof depends on the audience, not on the position taken.
- Of course, in a debate setting, both sides have to take a positive position or it won't be much of a debate.
- I have no opinion on your proposed change. --Jaban 13:24, 12 October 2010 (CDT)