“I. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: (appea lto ignorance) the
fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis
that it has not been proved false or that itis false
simply because it has not been proved true.
This error in reasoning is often expressed with
“The truth of a claim is established only on the basis of
lack of evidence against it. A simple obvious example
of such fallacy is to argue that unicorns exist because
there is no evidence against such a claim. At first sight
it seems that many theories that we describe as
scientific involve such a fallacy. E.g. the first law of
thermodynamics holds because so far there has not
been any negative instance that would serve as
evidence against it. But notice, as in cases like this,
there is evidence for the law, namely positive
instances. Notice also that this fallacy does not apply
to situations where there are only two rival claims and
one has already been falsified, then we may justly
establish the truth of the other even if we cannot find
evidence for or against it.”
If you make a claim to be true based on the lack of
evidence, then it is an appeal to ignorance. If I
claim God exists for absolute certainty with no
evidence, then it’s an appeal to ignorance. If I say
that God doesn’t exist because it hasn’t been
proven, then that would be an appeal to
ignorance because you’ve given no evidence to
support your claim. Now if you say that you
believe in God or don’t believe than that’s a
faith based believe which is okay for individuals
belief. If you’re engaging in a conversation
with a skeptic, you should probably have
evidence to justify your beliefs to have a
good conversation with a skeptic.
Have you’ve ever heard there’s no evidence for
God, so therefore he does not exist. If this is not
an appeal to ignorance, then I don’t what is. An Atheism
must establish this claim with evidence just like a
theist has to when it comes to establishing the
truth about the claim of God. Don’t let the atheist pull
the special pleading fallacy along with their
appeal to ignorance fallacy by saying it’s a
lack of believe. I will touch on the lack of belief in a future article
This appeal to ignorance fallacy is a great
example to find faulty in theist and atheist
logic. It’s great to have this in your arsenal
of logical fallacies to deal with skeptical
arguments. Theist are usually accused of an
appeal to ignorance while many atheists use
this fallacy when they say their atheism is
justified by absence of evidence.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
We have to deal with what’s more
plausible or implausible to avoid the
infamous appeal to ignorance fallacy. We
give evidences to ensure a position is more
true than false. If you don’t give
evidence and make a truth claim, then you
appeal to ignorance. This fallacy is pretty
simply to understand and must be avoided
in a debate with a skeptic. Now you have
the ad hominem and ad ignorantiam to help
engage in debates.
Please comment and share this article with someone.
Please follow me on Instagram @JMDapologetics101.
Please follow me on Twitter @JMDapologetics.
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel JMDapologetics101.
Send me an email @JMDapologetics101gmail.com.