Abstract

The Burden of God Fallacy is the irrational assignment of an epistemic burden to another speaker while exempting oneself from the same standard. It is a form of special pleading when the exemption lacks a relevant justification. A negation of a claim is an affirmation of an alternative. This also presupposes that at least one word can be proven which allows the question “what must happen for a word to be proven as true?” to be asked. If a word cannot be proven as true, simpliciter, then the alleged burden is moot.

Example:

“Abortion should not be legal” (negation) translates to “abortion should be illegal.” (affirmation)

If two subjects are of the same nature (humanity) and one subject imposes a moral obligation on the other, then the rule, if universally applied to all members of that kind, would apply to both subjects. If the standard is not of the universal kind, then who, what, when, how, where and why I must be asked for why those words mean anything of value.

A couple of definitions for consideration:

Burden: Should this be defined by me? Why would the burden to define “burden” not fall onto the individual who says “you have the burden.” Why must it be something someone else accepts? Do burdens objectively exist? Is a burden morally loaded language? Can science measure burdens? It is a burden according to what? If I were to define it, then I would define “burden” as “moral duty” (epistemic obligations have normative entailments) but if I’m discussing this topic with a human who denies moral duties as a factual thing, then I would have no real burden whatsoever. Either moral duties must be a fact or the other party now has a burden to define what they believe a burden is without entailing a factual moral commitment.

Fallacy: an error in reasoning

1. The Formalized Fallacy

P1. If theists have a burden to prove “God is the Word,” whenever commanded, then, in accordance with their own rules, the one who commanded proof for God being the Word has a burden to prove every word they express whenever commanded.

If you affirm the antecedent, then you agree that everyone (including you) has a burden to prove every expressed word whenever commanded.

If you negate the consequent then The Burden of God Fallacy has been committed.

C. Therefore, in accordance with their own rules, the one who commanded proof for God being the Word has a burden to prove every word they express whenever commanded.

Side note: this also entails that it is possible to prove words, making words themselves truth apt.

If an atheist demands that the believer prove “God is the Word” because the believer affirmed it, the atheist cannot consistently deny the same principle when applied to their own affirmations.

2. The Fallacy

The fallacy occurs when the rule is:

“If you affirm it, you must prove it when I demand proof.”

The believer/expresser can simply ask “says who?”

but its practical application becomes: