Burden of Proof

[red29216]

So, who do you think has the burden of proof? The believers or the non-believers? (For any issue).

[shaamansu]

I think probably both. It just depends on what 'proof' you are looking for, as well as what you believe in.

[Liz]

I agree.
Believer: "You don't think psionics exsits/is real? Proove me wrong."
Non-believer: "You honestly think psionics exists/is real? Proove it, then."

[shaamansu]

:Dzliz, I agree. You said that very well.

[Darin Rosewood]

Burden of proof in a debate always goes to whoever makes the original claim.

[phlatline]

It should be noted that you can not disprove something to exist. If you say "The giant spaghetti monster created the universe and everything in it" and a skeptic says "Prove it" saying "but you can't disprove it" does not make you right. No one can disprove something to exist.

[onine]

In truth, there is no belief, therefor there cannot be a Believer or Non-Believer. Physics dictates that we are all merely Observers, regardless of belief. Unless we have truly observed a thing, whatever thing you are talking about at the time, you cannot say for certain, "onine is god and demands all hot chix be his sex slaves." <-- because A.) You cannot define "God"; the definition of God is "Supreme Being"--therefor indefinable scientifically, and B.) I may be Homosexual; I may be submissive myself, or I may be a hot chick.

If what I just said left you with the thought, "What?" then you are indeed listening.

[phlatline]

onine said:

In truth, there is no belief, therefor there cannot be a Believer or Non-Believer. Physics dictates that we are all merely Observers, regardless of belief. Unless we have truly observed a thing, whatever thing you are talking about at the time, you cannot say for certain, "onine is god and demands all hot chix be his sex slaves." <-- because A.) You cannot define "God"; the definition of God is "Supreme Being"--therefor indefinable scientifically, and B.) I may be Homosexual; I may be submissive myself, or I may be a hot chick.

If what I just said left you with the thought, "What?" then you are indeed listening.

Sounds like your opinion more than anything else. Who says "in truth there is no belief?" Besides you that is.

[reuterhakey]

hmmmm.... well like that one dude was sayen that reality is what it is reguardless of belief. then again out observations are based on our ability to observe. so there is possibly a whole part or many parts to "reality" out there that we are missing due to our inabilitys. also i remember hearing some where tat reality is an illusion so if thats so then what dictates the illusion?!? equally important is if thats valid than what alters and/or controls the illusion?! i mean when i was reading phasing stuff i was thinking that stuff is amazing! but then they give an explaination like it magically moves the atoms.... seriously... thats the best explaination..... i mean what if the item in question to be phased is simply part of this illusion and some how the phasing dealeo was simply altering the illusion or manipulating the "reality" we exist in on some other level that is not normally sensed or accessed by physical applications!! then again it could be that our "energies" directly cause the phasing. then again if the physical "reality" is a shadow to the metaphysical "reality" then perhaps the influence exerted on the metaphysical will always out do any force or "law" im place in the physical?! course im sorta new and babbling but hey.... here be my 2 cents
now to the burden of proof thing.. i think each persons precieved reality is based on their opinions i mean even 2 believers can have a diffrent opinion or perspective of the same thing forming there own reality... right?! then again how i see it there are alot of wanna-be's out there that taint things, but i still say that this whole psi dealeo seems legit. btw some where back home in my room i have a book where they formed a group of scientific non-believers to do paranormal research of various sorts, and at the end of their reseach each was a firm believer. so id say that the burden of proof stands with belief, but be careful as to the details of what you believe!!! cause if you stray from reality then you get the wanna-be's.... [note: i hope i was on topic! im new, ummmm sorry if i wrote a bit too much. oh, also i hope you liked my response... also that i conveyed what i mean correctly into words. also that its understood properly. so forth so on...]