Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?

[Thumpalumpacus]

The distinction between what we can imagine and what we are justified in believing as true would remain; as well, so would the distinction between what we are justified in believing as true and what is actually true.  I believe that we can be justified in a belief given our current reasons or evidence, and still be ultimately wrong about that belief.

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

That's right. It's very rare that more information occludes the issue. Evidence is information.

Evidence is to justification as bricks are to buildings.

---

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.

But the thing is, one claim is abstract, and the other posits a claim about reality. When we're talking about the existence of a being in reality, it is not an abstraction, and cannot be evidenced by simple words.