|
|
Ad Ignorantium (Appeal to Ignorance) |
| Description: | ||
| The argument mistakes lack of evidence for evidence to the contrary. In effect, the argument says, "No one knows it is true. Therefore it is false." (Sometimes, in order to make the claim that "no one knows," the argument insists on an inappropriately strong standard of proof.) | ||
|
|
||
| Comments: | ||
|
||
| The phrase "ad ignorantium" is a Latin phrase that means (just as one would expect) "(appeal) to ignorance." | ||
|
|
||
| Examples: | ||
| "There is no proof that hand gun legislation will reduce crime. We can only conclude that outlawing handguns would be a futile gesture." | ||
| "Why do elephants paint their toenails red? To hide in strawberry patches. Have you ever seen an elephant in a strawberry patch? That proves that it works!" | ||
|
|
||
| Discussion: | ||
| In legal reasoning "burden of proof" is an important
concept. In criminal cases, the burden of proof is on the prosecutor, i.e.
the defendant is "innocent until proven guilty." Even outside the law, it is
important to keep track of the point that needs to be established. Do you
need to prove that your own position is true, or do you merely need to show
that it has not yet been proven false? In other words, is the burden of
proof on you or on your opponent? If the burden of proof is on your
opponent, then showing that there is no good evidence to contradict your
position is all you need to do. Good reasoning requires nothing further. In most cases (outside of criminal law, where the burden of proof is determined by principles of justice) the assumption of truth is with the older, more established view, or with the view that most people accept (especially if those people are "experts.") The burden of proof, then, generally falls on the view that is newer or only held by a minority. The Ad Ignorantium fallacy mimics good reasoning by arguing that a position has not yet been shown to be false, which is a perfectly acceptable argument to make in many cases. However, the Ad Ignorantium fallacy errs by trying to make this argument in a context in which the burden of proof falls on the arguer to show that his or her position is actually true, not just that it has not yet been shown false. Since these two issues are closely related, they are easy to confuse. |
||
|
|
||
| Classification: An Error in Observation (an inductive fallacy of soundness with a falsehood in the major premiss). | ||
| Source: John Locke, Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1690. Locke takes credit for naming this fallacy. | ||
Go to: WELCOME EXPLANATION of PRINCIPLES TABLE of FALLACIES EXERCISES INDEX