Why Can You Dismiss an Argument Without Evidence?

It is entirely permissible to dismiss an argument that has not been substantiated with evidence. This principle, famously referred to as Kant in some circles but more accurately as Hitchens' Razor, is a cornerstone of critical thinking and sound reasoning. The assertion, “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”, encapsulates the idea that unfounded claims lack merit and cannot be trusted.
However, dismissing an argument without providing concrete refutations might seem harsh. If contrary evidence exists, it's more constructive to present it openly and decisively. Nevertheless, if an argument has not been properly demonstrated or supported, it can be dismissed without further ado. Just as asserting the existence of ducks on Saturn without providing evidence is akin to making a baseless claim.

Real-World Analogy: Dismissing Unfounded Claims

Imagine playing a game of dice with a friend who argues, “I won’t throw the dice because I know the roll will be a six and I automatically win.” Such an assertion, without any evidence or proof, is easily dismissed. Similarly, in a debate or discussion, if someone makes a claim without evidence, it is entirely appropriate to dismiss it just as you would dismiss the dice example.
Just as asserting the presence of ducks on Saturn can be easily dismissed, unfounded claims lack credibility and any discussion about their existence can be brought to a quick conclusion. This principle is akin to saying, “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,” but it also holds true for the other end of the spectrum where a clear absence of evidence is a valid dismissal.

Balancing Evidence and Argument

Not all arguments can be dismissed so easily. Arguments that are consistent with all relevant evidence, and which have strong evidence supporting them, cannot be dismissed without evidence. For example, the claim that “Covid vaccines have far more benefits than risks even in younger populations” stands on strong evidence. Dismissing such arguments without providing counter-evidence would be unfair and unconstructive.
However, arguments based on indirect evidence, such as the opinion that “there is almost certainly life elsewhere in the universe”, can be contested by alternative opinions. These are more subjective and open to interpretation, so dismissing them might involve the concept of agreeing to disagree. Accepting that different people might hold different views on the same subject can lead to more productive discussions and mutual respect.

Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

There are instances where arguments require not just evidence, but extraordinary evidence to support highly extraordinary claims. The statement, “the God described in the Bible exists”, exemplifies such a claim. Such extraordinary assertions are rarely, if ever, substantiated with solid evidence. For these claims to be credible, they would need significant and overwhelming evidence to support them.
In conclusion, dismissing an argument without evidence is a justified approach when the claim itself lacks substantiation. However, if evidence does exist, it is essential to present it constructively. This balanced approach ensures that discussions remain respectful and evidence-based, leading to more informed and constructive dialogues.

Keywords: Hitchens' Razor, Evidence-Based Argument, Dismissal Without Evidence