Sure of yourself, sure of the truth?
On the axis: Relation to certainty · a claim
Should a conviction asserted with aplomb but no proof carry the day, or must we demand reasons before believing, even at the discomfort of suspending judgment?
Over a meal, someone you respect advances, in a perfectly assured tone, a claim that clashes with what you had until now taken for granted. They seem informed, cite their reading, show not the slightest doubt. You, in the moment, have no way to check: nothing to prove them wrong, nothing to prove yourself right. Eyes turn to you, and the silence calls for an answer. What do you make of this claim that nothing here comes to prove?
Your choice above is recorded in your profile. See my profile →
Anchors: Clifford · William James
leads to: Ethics of belief