Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Burden of proof

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of the concept of burden of proof in argument. Relationship of burden of proof to three traditional informal fallacies is considered: (i) argumentum ad hominem, (ii) petitio principii, and (iii) argumentum ad ignorantiam. Other topics discussed include persuasive dialoque, pragmatic reasoning, legal burden of proof, plausible reasoning in regulated disputes, rules of dialogue, and the value of reasoned dialogue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barth, E. M. and Krabbe, E. C. W.: 1982, From Axiom to Dialogue, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratko, Ivan: 1986, Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Robert: 1970, ‘The Burden of Proof,’ American Philosophical Quarterly 7, 74–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, W. K.: 1877, ‘The Will to Believe,’ Contemporary Review 30, 42–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 8, 15th ed., Chicago, 1973. Article on ‘Evidence’ by “R. E. De,” 905–916.

  • Forsyth, Richard: 1984, Expert Systems, Chapman and Hall, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C.L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen,London.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, William: 1896, The Will to Believe and Other Essays in Popular Philosophy, Longmans Green, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, Nicholas: 1976, Plausible Reasoning, Van Gorcum, Assen and Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, Nicholas: 1977, Dialectics, State University of New York Press, Albany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Richard: 1971, ‘Arguing from Ignorance,’ Philosophical Quarterly 21, 97–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sproule, J. Michael: 1976, ‘The Psychological Burden of Proof,’ Communication Monographs 43, 115–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, Frans H. van and Grootendorst, Rob: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas N.: 1985, Arguer's Position, Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas N. and Batten, Lynn M.: 1984, ‘Games, Graphs and Circular Arguments,’ Logique et Analyse 106, 133–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, John and Walton, Douglas: 1978, ‘The Fallacy of Ad Ignorantiam,’ Dialectica 32, 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whately, Richard: 1828, Elements of of Rhetoric, ed. Douglas Ehninger, Carbondale and Edwardsville, Southern Illinois University Press. Reprint of 7th ed. of 1846.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Winnipeg, R3B 2E9, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

    Douglas N. Walton

Authors
  1. Douglas N. Walton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walton, D.N. Burden of proof. Argumentation 2, 233–254 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00178024

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00178024

Key words

Search

Navigation