Argumentum ad Ignorantiam

Past Belief follows an interpretation that a certain claim is true because of its support from the past. It is true that most of these beliefs are relatively harmless. However, knowing that you only believe on something because of the existence of the past is distressing. And it may be misleading to engage in such beliefs. Most of these beliefs originate from early primitive years. The idea that the earth is flat was a common belief from the prior ages. Until it has been discussed by some Classical Greeks, the proposition remained true and suggested no more arguments.

It is important to note that past beliefs have survived through in this modern society. People tend to have definite accounts for almost anything which most of the time contradicts the facts. Nevertheless, it is the preference of every person that will prevail whether to believe into something or not.

Argumentum ad Ignorantiam is a fallacy that can usually work in two ways.

Get quality help now

Marrie pro writer

Verified writer

Proficient in: Arguments

5 (204)

“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

It explains that a certain idea is true because it has not been proved as false and vice versa. A person argues that no ghosts or any extraordinary being exist because such existence has not been proved yet shows an example of an argumentative fallacy. Similarly, the belief that ghosts exist because their non-existence has not been proved yet suggests an argumentative fallacy as well. Oftentimes, argumentum ad ignorantiam shows a persuasive approach. However, such reasoning is normally fallacious in nature.

Presumption of innocence before proven guilty is another example of argumentum ad ignorantiam.

Unless concrete evidences show that a certain act is done and unless due process is implemented, the innocence of a person brought forth to court remains true. However, for the defenders, such innocence may be terminated and they may continue to believe that the person brought to court is the culprit of the crime. Thus, depending on his or her choice or belief, a person prompts a decision or action that develops either a true or a fabricated result.