[Fangrim]

Quote by: Zhavric Isherwood understands the difference between burden of proof and the responsibility of supporting an argument. Let's look at an example: Isherwood: "You stole my credit cards! I have your fingerprints in my house and heard noise last night. It must have been you." Fangrim: "I did not steal your credit cards." In this argument, Isherwood has the burden of proof which he's attempted to meet with the evidence he has. You have the responsibility to supporting your side of the argument by challenging Isherwood's allegation. If Isherwood hadn't said anything to you, there'd be no reason for you to make that claim. I'm sure you haven't gone around to your friends and co-workers today saying, "DUDE! I didn't take your credit cards!" They'd prolly look at you funny... If your reply is only "nuh-uh" that's not a strong argument. You've simply denied his allegation without giving us any compelling reason to do so. Your burden in this argument would be to explain why your fingerprints are in Isherwood's place... maybe from a party last week... and explain how impossible it would be for you to be at his house last night. "Man, I was watching a film and then went for coffee. Here are my reciepts from both." In this way you've supported your argument, but you've never actually carried the burden of proof. That's still Isherwood's.

Zhavric, if you use one more judicial example of burdens of proof, I'm going to smash something. We've been over this. Want me to go looking for that thread? I will.

I'll edit this once I find it. [decided to make it a new post]