Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?

[robvalue]

This is my take on it:

We must be careful not to confuse proofs with evidence. And yes, any particular claim may well be true but doesn't/can't have evidence provided. True but irrelevant. Dismissing a claim is not, by default, making a counter claim. And people can make whatever stupid claims they want, as much as they like. It's not like I can stop them. There are also the problems of coherency and relevance before you even consider truth.

Generally speaking, proofs apply to abstract systems, and demonstrate a claim to be true. Evidence applies to reality, and adds confidence that a claim is true. Science ultimately deals with the latter, although obviously it utilizes many convenient abstract systems while studying reality.

Personally, if I make such a statement as, "Claims require evidence", I'm employing a shorthand. Attacking the statement itself on semantic grounds, as if it was a claim of proof, is ignoring the shorthand. One of those stupid published apologists called this the "Roadrunner tactic" and was very proud of it. (I'm being serious, I'm not making fun of our member with the same name. I'll see if I can find the video.)

I'm actually suggesting a pragmatic approach, such as, "Experience has shown me that spending time considering claims accompanied by evidence is more likely to produce a useful idea regarding reality than considering claims which do not or cannot have accompanying evidence. This is because the evidence gives a workable method of establishing what is true, by demonstrating something has been learned and applied to reality." My experience, coupled with that of every sensible person who seems to agree with me, is the evidence. I'm always open to counter-evidence, of course. You can consider me to be holding up a pre-amble card with this type of thing most of the time, including for this post.

If I talked in such precise terms all the time, I'd pretty quickly only be talking to myself. I assume, when talking informally, that most people will use common sense to add these implications.