Question

[cedric1200]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

 

[Emmy]

Dear cedric1200. What about Love? God is Love and Love covers a multitude of sins. Satan and all his followers run away from Love, and Love is very catching. Love changes everything for the better, whether people or circumstances. God wants our Love, freely given and No conditions tagged on.
Paul tells us in " 1) Corinthians: 13: 13: Now abides Faith, Hope and Love,
these three, but the greatest of these is Love. I say this with love, cedric.
Greetings from Emmy, your sister in Christ.

 

[PsychoSarah]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

By wanting it to be true so much that internally, they begin to view it as such, because the alternative of it being wrong becomes too upsetting to handle.

 

[agua]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

It depends what type of belief you mean. Strong emotional belief can be estlished through what feels good, or bad etc without investigation or interrogation; but strong experential belief requires investigation and interrogation of evidence.

This is why Paul said it's vital to examine your beliefs/faith constantly.

 

[Mediaeval]

First principles or truths that are perceived as self-evident are the starting point for rational arguments and handling evidence. Logical arguments ordinarily cannot work without presuppositions.

"Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding truth; on the contrary, truth is necessarily an instrument for using logic—for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth and for the profit of humanity. Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." G. K. Chesterton

 

[Received]

First principles or truths that are perceived as self-evident are the starting point for rational arguments and handling evidence. Logical arguments ordinarily cannot work without presuppositions.

"Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding truth; on the contrary, truth is necessarily an instrument for using logic—for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth and for the profit of humanity. Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." G. K. Chesterton

Yes.

What's the logical justification (i.e., evidence) for logic? Wait a minute.

 

[variant]

Yes.

What's the logical justification (i.e., evidence) for logic? Wait a minute.

An observation of the lack of utility of not logic.

 

[variant]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

You can believe whatever you like, you can't know it is truth or properly make a claim to truth without evidence.

 

[Gottservant]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

To know you have evidence, is to know when you need it.

Knowing "when" you need evidence, does not answer a whole host of questions, about whether having that evidence is even appropriate.

Someone with faith, is easily able to say I would rather know why it is I know, than guess where I might end up not knowing.

 

[Received]

An observation of the lack of utility of not logic.

Justification for logic = an appeal to truth.

You give me utility.

Utility is not truth.

 

[variant]

Justification for logic = an appeal to truth.

You give me utility.

Utility is not truth.

Define truth then please and how it differs from utility.

 

[Received]

Define truth then please and how it differs from utility.

Define truth? Gee, variant, why don't you give me a hard challenge for once?

Truth refers to statements which line up with (or are correctly representative of) reality. That's the conceptual understanding. The Heideggerian one (which I'm partial to but still uncertain about) holds that truth is unveiling reality, such that something is true insofar as it is what it is. Hence, "you're a true friend." Does that mean you're a friend who is correctly conceptually represented? No. It means you are what a friend, "friend" having an experiential, observational tone.

Utility is what works.

 

[variant]

Define truth? Gee, variant, why don't you give me a hard challenge for once?

Truth refers to statements which line up with (or are correctly representative of) reality. That's the conceptual understanding. The Heideggerian one (which I'm partial to but still uncertain about) holds that truth is unveiling reality, such that something is true insofar as it is what it is. Hence, "you're a true friend." Does that mean you're a friend who is correctly conceptually represented? No. It means you are what a friend, "friend" having an experiential, observational tone.

Utility is what works.

Does truth work?

 

[Gottservant]

Does truth work?

Meaning works, truth arranges.

 

[variant]

Meaning works, truth arranges.

What I am really asking there is if truth is part of "what works" or not.

 

[Gottservant]

What I am really asking there is if truth is part of "what works" or not.

What God told you through me, is sufficient.

Truth arranges meaning, meaning works, (but truth does not work).

Fools think truth works, because they are already convinced of their own foolishness.

 

[Received]

Does truth work?

Not intrinsically, no. That's why people lie.

 

[TheBibleMan]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

Answer:

Just like they can believe in a lies without no evidence.

 

[variant]

Not intrinsically, no. That's why people lie.

I mean on a basic level, you know for questions like "is logic justified".

 

[Received]

I mean on a basic level, you know for questions like "is logic justified".

How would that work in this case?