Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?

[bennyboy]

. . .

Try an example.

That -was- my example Benny, I think that's true.  

I don't think you know what "example" means. Give an example of valid arguments applied to sound propositions with regards to your metaphysical view. You claim that claims require evidence, and that would include claims about the nature of our existence, about which I know you DO hold a position.

See, you've used sensory experiences as support for a material world view in the past. My argument is that this kind of evidence is limited in scope (which I call context)--it can give truth about our mundane world, but not about where the world comes from, or why. In other words, if you claim to have used evidence to support your metaphysical claims, you have violated the principle of evidence, and in a particularly self-deluding way.