← Back to archive

How do you tell the possibility of an explanation when determining if an argument is an argument from ignorance?

Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.

Original Question

How do I do that? Is the mere ability to conceive of a situation / cause means that it is possible? I’ve also heard that there is epistemic, metaphysical and logical possibilities with each one being different. Do I have to consider the type of possibility too? Also how do I differentiate then?

Answers

1

The argument from ignorance is the assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. You don't even need to consider possibility here. If I said God exists because you can't prove that he doesn't, this is an argument from ignorance. The fact that it is possible for God to exist or not doesn't matter; the fallacy lies within the argument structure not the content.


If I am misunderstanding you, please let me know.

Logically Fallacious book by Bo Bennett

Want the full book?

Get the complete guide to logical fallacies by Bo Bennett.

Buy the Book

Master Logical Fallacies Online

Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.

View Online Course