Embed Notice

@selzero @denisbloodnok

The point of the argument from ignorance is that you cannot conclude an argument being true or false based on a negation.

To break down your argumentation with a parallel example.

There is no indication from the Home Office or FA that language criteria will be added to this.

" I see no apples in the store, ..."

Ergo, as it stands, footballers are exempt.

"... therefore apples does not exist"

And you can replace your FA/HO arguments and conclusion with the 11th commandment. It's the same.

All these argument are lacking a reason, an evidence, which supports the initial argument why it becomes true.