Location
Brock University
Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1997 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1997 5:00 PM
Abstract
Various textbooks in logic and rhetoric seem content to treat the notion of the burden of proof as if it were a simple obligation associated with the act of proffering statements for another's consideration. Nevertheless, we can uncover cases in argumentation where both sides champion statements but only one side bears a burden of proof. I believe that an explanation for this difference in emphasis will involve distinguishing between two different (but not unrelated) burdens of proof that can come to bear in the course of an argument.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
Fred Kauffeld, Commentary on Thomson
Reader's Reactions
Fred Kauffeld, Commentary on Thomson (May 1997)
Included in
On ‘Burdens’ of Proof in Ordinary Language Argumentation
Brock University
Various textbooks in logic and rhetoric seem content to treat the notion of the burden of proof as if it were a simple obligation associated with the act of proffering statements for another's consideration. Nevertheless, we can uncover cases in argumentation where both sides champion statements but only one side bears a burden of proof. I believe that an explanation for this difference in emphasis will involve distinguishing between two different (but not unrelated) burdens of proof that can come to bear in the course of an argument.
