The Argument from Ignorance

Argument from Ignorance

Also known as argumentum ad ignorantium, appeal to ignorance, absence of evidence, argument from personal astonishment, argument from Incredulity.

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/54-argument-from-ignorance

The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

Logical Form

X is true, because you cannot prove that X is false.
X is false, because you cannot prove that X is true.

Example 1
To this very day (at the time of this writing), science has been unable to create life from all inorganic substances, therefore life must be a result of divine intervention.

Explanation: The fact that we have not found a way to create life from all inorganic substances is not evidence that there is no way to create life from all inorganic substances.

Example 2
For me, once the speculations for the beginnings of anything remain unexplainable, then rationally it is necessary we recognize someone, something, or creating entity was/is beyond our human science principles and understanding. I choose to call this someone "God"

Explanation: This is a variation of the argument from ignorance known as the argument from personal incredulity. It is formed thus: P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false. In this example, it is assumed the beginning of our universe is unexplainable and beyond human science, therefore the only possible explanation is God. This is very closely related to the [ God of the Gaps ] fallacy which assumes anything that science cannot explain can only be explained by the existence of God. 

Example 3

"Those who only critique and offer no alternative have a weak argument."

Explanation:  Whoever is making this argument implies that because his opponent has no alternative argument to offer must therefore have a weak argument. Obviously this is not the case. An explanation for something is not true just because no one has a better idea. 

Example 4
"Your claim that God’s existence is unlikely given the lack of evidence, is the Argument from Ignorance."

Explanation: This is not what The Argument from Ignorance says.

Example 5
You claim God's existence is unlikely due to a lack of evidence An appeal to ignorance in support of a conclusion is fallacious reasoning, please provide an actual reasoned basis for your posited claim--thanks!

Explanation: The appeal to ignorance is indeed a fallacious argument, but doubting the claim that God exists because of a lack of evidence is not an appeal to ignorance.   The argument from ignorance says:  “If one argues that God or telepathy, ghosts, or UFO's do not exist because their existence has not been proven beyond a shadow of doubt, then this fallacy occurs.” Doubting the claim that God exists is very different to claiming that God does not exist because His existence has not been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.   In any case,  God is unfalsifiable and so His existence can never be proven or disproven. 


Example 6
All you proffer is a claim based on an argument from ignorance, i.e. you believe God's existence is unlikely due to a lack of evidence. We all know your argument is logically fallacious. 

Explanation: Considering God's existence to be unlikely due to a lack of evidence, is not the argument from ignorance. 

Example 7
The argument form ignorance states: If one argues that God, telepathy, and so on do exist because their non-existence has not been proved, then one argues fallaciously.  If we change the wording then the same applies to your expressed claim that God is unlikely to exist.

Explanation: If you change the wording, you change the meaning. I have never argued that God does not exist because His non-existence has not been proved. I’ve made it clear that perhaps God does exist.  I’m saying God’s existence is unlikely due to the lack of evidence.