(March 8, 2018 at 8:58 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Why on earth should anyone need to give a reason not to believe in something ?
And that is precisely the reason in a nutshell for burden of proof.
What theists forget is that there are so many competing beliefs. The default is not to have a belief in any of them. But there are things that are demonstrable and reproducible that we do actually know.
Therefore the burden of proof is on those who seek to change the default.
For example, I know that if I jump out the window then I will fall to the ground. That is essentially the default belief. It is silly to call it a belief but until I have jumped out the window then I don't know for sure that gravity will prevail. But if you believe in some magic ability that can cause you to levitate, then the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that such a magic ability exists.
The burden of proof is more obviously a good thing in a scientific context when there will always be a myriad of failed hypotheses before hitting upon the correct solution. Without testing each hypothesis we wouldn't make any progress.
