Argument from ignorance

src: i.ytimg.com

Arguments of ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam ), also known as < b> appeal to ignorance (where ignorance represents "lack of conflicting evidence") is an error in informal logic. This confirms that the proposition is true because it has not been proven wrong or wrong proposition because it has not been proven true. This is a kind of false dichotomy because it does not include the third option, that there may be inadequate investigations, and therefore there is not enough information to prove the proposition to be true or false. Nor does it allow acceptance that the choice may actually not be two (true or false), but possibly as many as four,

1. is correct
2. is incorrect
3. not known between true or false
4. unknowable (among the first three).

In the debate, the request for ignorance is sometimes used in an effort to shift the burden of proof.

Video Argument from ignorance

Ikhtisar

Argumen dasar

As described in Visual Vision and Perception Schreuder: :

Arguments that attract ignorance rely on only in the fact that the truth of the proposition is not refuted to arrive at a definite conclusion. These arguments fail to appreciate that the limits of one's understanding or certainty do not change what is right. They do not inform in reality. That is, whatever the reality, it does not "wait" on logic or human analysis to be formulated. Reality exists all the time, and it's independently what anyone thinks. And the real impulse of science and rational analysis is to separate the preconceived notions of what reality, and to be open to the observation of nature when behaving, so as to actually find reality. This mistake can be very convincing and considered by some as a special case of a false dilemma or false dichotomy because both fail to consider alternatives. False dilemmas can be:

• If a proposition has not been denied, then it can not be considered wrong and should therefore be considered true.
• If the proposition has not been proven, it can not be considered true and should therefore be considered wrong.

Such arguments seek to exploit the fact that (a) righteous things can never be denied and (b) wrong things can never be proved. In other words, the plea for ignorance claims that the opposite of these facts is also true. Therein lies the error.

To reaffirm, these arguments ignore the facts, and the difficulties, that some of the right things will never be proven, and some wrong things may never be denied with absolute certainty. The phrase " the absence of proof is not evidence of absence " can be used as a brief rebuttal to the second form of an ignorance error (ie P was never really proven and therefore of course wrong ). Most often directed at any conclusions that come from null generate experiments or from non-detection of something. In other words, where a researcher might say their experiments show evidence of absence, other researchers may argue that the experiment failed to detect the phenomenon for other reasons.

Confusing things

Much of the confusion about the argument from ignorance can be caused when one side of the debate forgets that we often have evidence of absence in practice. However, confusion can be avoided by not participating in a logical debate.

Ignorance of ignorance is sometimes confusing (or combined) with valid logical contrapositive arguments. The contrapositive argument properly utilizes the inference transposition rule in classical logic to conclude something like: As far as C implies E then Not-E must also imply Not-C . In other words, if a cause always leads to an effect, the absence of the expected effect is evidence of no cause. For example, if a causal proposition that if it rains outside then the road will be wet is assumed, it can be assumed that if the road is not wet then it does not rain outside . The conclusion is that the rain can not come down outside because the streets are not wet exactly, or perhaps equally untrue, as the original proposition. The statement is logically equivalent.

Carl Sagan menjelaskan dalam bukunya The Demon-Haunted World :

Appeals to ignorance : claims that anything that has not been proven wrong must be true, and vice versa. (For example, There is no convincing evidence that UFOs do not visit Earth, therefore UFOs exist, and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Or: There may be seventy world cazilars but nothing is known to have the moral progress of the Earth, so we are still at the center of the universe. This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the sentence: the absence of proof is not evidence of absence.

For example, the absence of evidence that rain (ie water is evidence) can be regarded as positive proof that the rain does not fall. Again, in science, such conclusions are always made for some limited (sometimes very high) probability levels and in this case the absence of evidence is evidence of absence when positive evidence should exist but does not exist.

Arguments of ignorance can easily find their way into the debate about the existence of God. It is a mistake to draw conclusions based on ignorance appropriately, as this does not satisfactorily address the problem of philosophical proof burden.

Maps Argument from ignorance

Related terms

Contraposition and transposition

Contraposition is a logically valid inference rule that allows the creation of new propositions of negation and reordering of existing ones. This method applies to any proposition of type If A then B and says that negating all the variables and redirecting them forward leads to a new proposition that is If Not-B then Not-A which is as true as the original and the first implies the second and the second implies the first.

Transposition is exactly the same thing as Contraposition, depicted in different languages.

Lack of evidence

The absence of evidence, is a lack of evidence - which may indicate, demonstrate, suggest, or use to 1) conclude, or 2) conclude the truth of the asserted facts.

Negative evidence

Negative evidence is sometimes used as an alternative to the absence of evidence and is often intended to be synonymous with it. On the other hand, the term may also refer to evidence with a negative value, or null equivalent to proof of absence . It may even refer to positive evidence of something unpleasant.

Evidence of absenteeism

Proof of absence is any evidence that can be used to infer or conclude the absence or absence of something. For example, if a doctor does not find a malignant cell in a patient, this zero (find nothing) result is evidence of no cancer, even if the doctor actually does not detect anything. Such inductive reasoning is important for empiricism and science, but has an established restriction. The challenge then becomes to try to identify when a researcher has received a zero result (finding nothing) because it does not exist (evidence of absence - objectively negative results), and when one does not have the proper detection means (no evidence - false negatives).

Nil yield

Null result is a term often used in science to show evidence of absence . Water search on soil can produce zero yield (dry soil); therefore, it may not rain.

src: quotefancy.com

Related arguments

Arguments of the auto-epistemic

The argument of identification takes the form:

1. If P is correct then I will know it; actually I did not know it; therefore P can not be true.
2. If P is wrong, then I will know it; actually I did not know it; therefore P can not be wrong.

In practice these arguments are often wrong and depend on the truth of the supporting premise. For example, the argument that If I had just sat in a wild hedgehog I would know it; actually i do not know it; therefore I am not just sitting on a wild hedgehog may not be a mistake and completely depends on the truth of the main proposition that supports it. (See Contraposition and Transposition in the Related terms section of this article.)

src: i.ytimg.com

Distinguish lack of evidence from absence evidence

Lack of evidence is a condition in which no valid conclusions can be deduced from the absence of detection, usually because of doubt in the detection method. Proof of Absence is a successful variation: a conclusion that relies on specific knowledge in relation to negative detection to conclude the absence of something. Examples of proof of absence are checking your pocket for a dime and finding nothing, but being confident that the search will find it if it's there.

Formal arguments

By determining that a particular experiment or detection method is sensitive enough and reliable enough to detect the presence of X (when X exists) one can confidently exclude the possibility that X may be undetectable and present. This allows one to infer that X can not be present if the null result is accepted.

So there are only two possibilities, given the null result:

1. Nothing detected, and X does not exist.
2. Nothing was detected, but X is present (option removed with careful research design).

To the extent that option 2 can be omitted, one can conclude that if X is not detected then X does not exist and therefore the zero result is proof of absence.

src: cdn.essaywriting.expert

Example

No evidence

(These examples contain or represent missing information.)

• A statement that begins with "I can not prove it but..." often refers to a kind of absence of evidence.
• "No evidence of dirty game here" is a direct reference to the absence of evidence.
• "There is no alien proof, and therefore, no aliens are" interesting in the absence of evidence

Negative results

• When doctors say that a negative test result, it's usually good news.
• Under "Termites" the inspector checks the box that says "no".

Proof of absence

(These examples contain definite proofs that can be used to indicate, show, suggest, conclude or infer the absence or absence of something.)

• Biopsy shows the absence of malignant cells.
• A person carefully checks the rear seat of a person's car and does not find an adult-size kangaroo.
• The train schedule did not say that the train stopped here at 3pm on a Sunday. (It may happen that the train will stop here for reasons other than the actual schedule, for example due to incidents or technical reasons, but the evidence clearly proves that the train schedule does not include stops at this station.)

Arguments of ignorance

(Drawing conclusions based on lack of knowledge or evidence without taking into account all possibilities)

• "I take the view that this lack of (subversive enemy activity on the west coast) is the most unpleasant sign in all of our situations.This assures me more than likely any other factor that sabotage we get, Fifth will get, time is like Pearl Harbor... I believe we are just lulled in the wrong sense of security. "- Earl Warren, California Attorney General (before the congress hearing in San Francisco on February 21, 1942).
• This example clearly states what appeals to ignorance is: "Although we have proved that the moon is not made of ribs, we have not proved that the point can not be filled with them, therefore the moon's core is filled with spare ribs. "

src: i.ytimg.com

The origin of the term

From Error: classical and contemporary readings by Hans V. Hansen, Robert C. Pinto:

"It is generally accepted that the philosopher John Locke introduced the term in the Essay Concerning Human Understanding:"

"Another way men usually use to encourage others, and force them to submit their Assessments, and accept Opinions in the debate, is to ask your opponent to acknowledge what they allege as Evidence, or to define better this I call Argumentum ad Ignorantiam "--John Locke

src: slideplayer.com

See also

• Prudential principles
• Russell teapot

src: i.ytimg.com

References

src: i.ytimg.com

Further reading

• Hansen, Hans V.; Pinto, Robert C. Errors: classical and contemporary readings .
• Copi, Irving M; Cohen, Carl (2010). Introduction to Logic (edition 14). Routledge. ISBN 978-0205820375. OCLCÃ, 862726425.
• Walton, D. (1992). "Unlimited Arguments From Ignorance" (PDF) . American Philosophical Quarterly . 29 (4): 381-387.
• Walton, D. (2010). Arguments from Ignorance . Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBNÃ, 978-0-271-04196-4 . Retrieved 2016-02-24 .
• Alton, Douglas G.; Bland, J. Martin (1995). "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". BMJ . 311 (7003): 485. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7003.485. Ã,

src: www.azquotes.com

External links

• Appeal to Authority - details section on Appeal to Ignorance
• The Error File - an article about Appeal to Ignorance

Source of the article : Wikipedia