Argument based on speculation

I was wondering if it is acceptable to argue a point that cannot be proven. For example; Person A states that majority of people on this earth have never stolen anything in their life. Would it be acceptable to argue against Person A using speculation as to why the majority of people have stolen at least once(human nature, etc)?

>>3

The argument is pretty weak, yes. If you are really trying to sell the idea that EVERYBODY has stolen, then your argument can be demolished by one person who has never stolen before. However, a lot of the time people are not that finicky, and are willing to accept the gist of what you are trying to say. This can be dangerous, though, and it is often done automatically without further questioning.

Anyway, you would need a more sound premise.

Don't let this get to you though. It's perfectly fine to be skeptical of an idea/claim because it does not match your understanding of how the world works. Saying that you find the claim to be unlikely for such-and-such a reason would be just fine as a response. It would also further the discussion.

I don't think that most people in the world have never stolen. Whether it's candy from a friend, a ciggerette, a little bit of money, whatever. I'm skeptical of the idea because of similar reasons as you (human nature, ect).