To Know Without a Doubt
Often we hear people talk of knowing something, then they say without a doubt. In many schools of thought, knowledge is acquired when doubts have come to a resolution as they are investigated to the point they become the most likely explanation over the previous assumption or knowledge. Then there is the other school of thought which selects something that is desired to be true and then continues by denying all doubt that could interfere with that knowledge. The latter often finds similar believing people banding together to strengthen each other in the face of difficult to explain knowledge they have chosen to defend. The first school band together, too but have a practice of constantly questioning, although it is not unheard of to have the same sort of groupthink occur at times but it is not the standard mo. As everything and everyone is natural I won't say which one is better, I can only say which one has led to less suffering for me.
I can't justify something as true without fully analyzing both sides and determining a most likely cause according to my observations. I am one of the people in this world who should not let his feelings go unquestioned and so I can't claim knowledge by a feeling. Of course many would argue no one should do anything of great importance solely on a feeling but that is not the point of this post. The fact is I am left with observation as the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge. To tell me to refrain from doubt is a line used by many, some of the most dangerous of which are swindlers and salesmen.
Is it possible to say one knows something if one refuses to examine the contrary points objectively? To realize the same arguments used for propping up one's own belief should be applied to other belief systems and see if they also legitimize something we don't believe in? This would mean we would question our own methods of course, because if your method is flawed, then there is a high likelyhood of a flawed result. If someone in almost every culture has near death experiences that reflect their cultural/religious view then what can we draw from that? If people from several religions testify they know without a doubt theirs is true, how do you choose between them if you can't trust feelings? Could it be investigating doubts until you have determined one of them matches the observable universe without relying on subjective information?
Belief in something is a pretty universal trait in our species. We can't get around it, so personally I don't believe in judging those who do. Do they create more suffering for themselves from that course? Well, that is for them to investigate and decide. Personally, I have reduced a lot for myself by looking for the root causes of things as pertains to me. Of course this more often than not leads back to me and expectations I have that are not rooted in anything factual, but rather deceptive feelings. Once a feeling is recognized as deceptive though, it can be processed. I can analyze it, try to find the root of it, and realize there is no monster in the room after all when I finally turn the light on.
Often we hear people talk of knowing something, then they say without a doubt. In many schools of thought, knowledge is acquired when doubts have come to a resolution as they are investigated to the point they become the most likely explanation over the previous assumption or knowledge. Then there is the other school of thought which selects something that is desired to be true and then continues by denying all doubt that could interfere with that knowledge. The latter often finds similar believing people banding together to strengthen each other in the face of difficult to explain knowledge they have chosen to defend. The first school band together, too but have a practice of constantly questioning, although it is not unheard of to have the same sort of groupthink occur at times but it is not the standard mo. As everything and everyone is natural I won't say which one is better, I can only say which one has led to less suffering for me.
I can't justify something as true without fully analyzing both sides and determining a most likely cause according to my observations. I am one of the people in this world who should not let his feelings go unquestioned and so I can't claim knowledge by a feeling. Of course many would argue no one should do anything of great importance solely on a feeling but that is not the point of this post. The fact is I am left with observation as the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge. To tell me to refrain from doubt is a line used by many, some of the most dangerous of which are swindlers and salesmen.
Is it possible to say one knows something if one refuses to examine the contrary points objectively? To realize the same arguments used for propping up one's own belief should be applied to other belief systems and see if they also legitimize something we don't believe in? This would mean we would question our own methods of course, because if your method is flawed, then there is a high likelyhood of a flawed result. If someone in almost every culture has near death experiences that reflect their cultural/religious view then what can we draw from that? If people from several religions testify they know without a doubt theirs is true, how do you choose between them if you can't trust feelings? Could it be investigating doubts until you have determined one of them matches the observable universe without relying on subjective information?
Belief in something is a pretty universal trait in our species. We can't get around it, so personally I don't believe in judging those who do. Do they create more suffering for themselves from that course? Well, that is for them to investigate and decide. Personally, I have reduced a lot for myself by looking for the root causes of things as pertains to me. Of course this more often than not leads back to me and expectations I have that are not rooted in anything factual, but rather deceptive feelings. Once a feeling is recognized as deceptive though, it can be processed. I can analyze it, try to find the root of it, and realize there is no monster in the room after all when I finally turn the light on.
