Which argument style assumes a conclusion is true simply because it has not been proven false?

The argument style that assumes a conclusion is true simply because it has not been proven false is known as Appeal to Ignorance. This type of reasoning operates on the principle that a lack of evidence against a claim is taken as evidence in favor of the claim. For example, if someone argues that since there is no definitive proof that extraterrestrial life does not exist, it must therefore exist, they are relying on the Appeal to Ignorance. This form of argument is often considered fallacious because it shifts the burden of proof away from the person making the claim, implying that one should believe something is true simply due to a lack of disproof.

This style contrasts with other arguments, such as Victory by Definition, which revolves around defining terms in a way that secures a certain conclusion, or Begging the Question, which assumes the conclusion within the premises. Inconsequent Argument refers to arguments that do not logically follow and therefore are deemed irrelevant. Understanding these distinctions helps clarify why Appeal to Ignorance is recognized specifically for its reliance on the absence of disproof as a basis for asserting truth.