Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?

[bennyboy]

Precisely, which is why your assertion that those asking for evidence of claims of existence are mistaken is, well, mistaken.

Well, that's granting that a claim can only be justified by evidence. But that itself is a claim that I don't think meets its own criteria, which is the point of this whole thread.  Unless I am misunderstanding what you mean by justification or evidence.

Yep.

What if I do not believe the senses can arrive at any kind of existential truth-- that they can be known to be true only in their own context?  What if I ask for evidence, as per your OP, that experiences CAN be used to validate metaphysical truth claims at all?

In short, what if I ask for evidence that evidence is the right way to go about proving philosophical or metaphysical truths? Since said cannot be provided without caveat ("Oh it's the best we have so far, of course we can revise it later because science. . . "), then does it negate itself in paradox and disappear in a puff of smoke called "pragmatic assumption"?