UNIT 2 INDIVIDUAL PROJECT
PHIL201-Introduction to Philosophy by Kendra M Hutchins
AIU Online
11-18-2012

Abstract

Everyday a new invention is made. A new cure for a disease is discovered. This is based off of evidence and knowledge. But who is to say what reality is and what is not? To what boundary are we willing to go to find out how true our existence is? Beliefs and religion is based off of knowledge of certain doctrines. But evidence is needed to support whatever your beliefs are.

The human race tends to have a variety of beliefs throughout both concrete and abstract areas of knowledge, in this essay I will explore to what degree beliefs need evidence. Using examples, I will focus on the following knowledge issues; does our perception of evidence justify our beliefs? And are we able to have beliefs without evidence? Noticeably, all areas of knowledge are benefited by support from evidence. It is a question of how much evidence is needed for sufficient support.
Title holds many concepts that can be explored in different ways. ‘Beliefs’ can be described as spontaneous occurrences of vivid ideas in the mind’ (Pojman). More abstract areas of knowledge such as art can adopt this meaning as they require less ‘evidence’ ;being subjective means that it does not necessarily require physical proof. ‘Beliefs can also be caused by experiencing things in constant conjunction to each other’ (Pojman). This depicts the fact that belief is more of a ‘reasoned process.’ More concrete areas of knowledge like Human and Natural sciences will usually follow this meaning. Science is a methodical process in which we experiment to test theories which constantly use evidence. ‘Evidence’ can be defined as the ‘availability of facts or information indicating whether a ‘belief’ or proposition is true or valid’. In this definition we already see that evidence demands physical proof. However, evidence is not limited to the physical state. For example, religion is individual and religious people claim to ‘believe in Gods existence’, evidence in this case may not be physical but it can be ‘gut feelings’ and ‘emotions’.
There are different ways of perceiving evidence; a young girl may take the money under her pillow as ‘evidence’ for her ‘belief’ in the tooth fairy. Her inexperience may lead her to believe that her elders are telling her the truth, leading to the vivid ideas in her mind being based on what authorities may tell her. However, to many this is false evidence, thus her belief is false. The only reason that her evidence is false is that we perceive the scenario through our knowledge that the elders have put the money under her pillow .Sometimes evidence given is not necessarily true which shows that evidence can be deceiving thus, not supporting our beliefs.
In more abstract areas of knowledge evidence seems unnecessary for the most part. Famous journalist Ann Landers said ‘No one has the right to destroy another person's belief by demanding empirical evidence’. I recently saw a ‘Robert Ruchensburg’ inspired collage. My initial opinion of it was that it had no unity and balance; I was not pleased by the artwork but my friends were. One may be completely repelled by an art piece, one may absolutely love it – it is a subjective opinion. I particularly find ‘emotion’ to be a more important support factor to an artistic belief; this would be the ‘evidence’ for the aesthetic or theoretic qualities in an art piece. Love falls under this, because who is to say when you love someone the feelings are real. Because you are in love based off the knowledge of what your partner has done to you and for you. The beauty of love tends to be universal. In this case, evidence helps strengthen ones belief and love.
Because empirical evidence is based off what you observe, I know my fiancé loves me. I know this because of the things he does. These are not irrational ideas or assumptions. Its is fact that he has done wonderful things for me. Often people cannot determine if someone really loves them or not. But using empirical evidence, I know he loves me. I do not have to guess or “believe” he loves me. Knowledge of this comes from years of knowing one another. And he knows when I am upset and knows just what to do to make me feel better. And all this without me asking.
More concrete areas of knowledge need physical evidence for support. In natural science we see that evidence acts as an extra bonus to any experiment. Utilizing ‘Hooke’s law’ in Physics implies that I believe it. I must be willing to go along with everything in relation to the law; my whole experiment is based on it- my hypothesis, explanations and conclusion. However, because I believe ‘Hooke’s Law’ I was slightly biased in my test and I disregarded other evidence that may have ruined my experiment. However, Einstein claimed that a natural scientist could carry on without having any belief in the truth of his favored hypothesis. He could rest content with accepting them in the light of cognitively relevant considerations (Pojman). There is enough relevant evidence for Hooke’s law but it is clear that when experimenting I have to be aware of potential flaws. This is in keeping with much of scientific practice whereby scientists use evidence most of the time but are also able to ignore it by means of falsification. Moreover, medical practice is ‘evidence based’ in that ‘the conscientious, explicit, judicious use of current best evidence is needed in making decisions about the care of individual patients’ (McPhee). Doctor’s prescriptions are based on results from unbiased trials. These trials eliminate bias by blinding patients from knowing whether they are receiving the therapy or not .Newer trials and drugs illustrate the falsification of previous medications as being the most supreme (McPhee). This again shows the importance of both the use and falsification of evidence.
It is clear that many areas of knowledge need evidence to support claims and beliefs. The two contrasting idea that ‘belief’ is ‘spontaneous’ or ‘reasoned’ is a determining factor to whether or not we need evidence. If ‘spontaneous’ then our beliefs do not demand much evidence, however, if ‘reasoned’ then evidence is needed to justify the belief. If evidence is perceived as ‘physical facts’ then it is needed to justify a belief. Likewise, if it is seen as ‘emotion’ then it helps support a belief .Even though our evidence isn’t always accurate, it is almost impossible to have beliefs without evidence because whether abstract or not there is a type of evidence that strengthens ones beliefs.

References
• Pojman, Louis P. What Can We Know?: an Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. Belmont [Calif.: Wadsworth Pub., 1995. Print.
• McPhee, Stephen J., and Maxine A. Papadakis. Current Consult Medicine 2007. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007. Print.
• Cambell, SL K. Flaws and Fallacies in Statistical Thinking. Dove, 2002. Print.
• Glanville, Alan. Economics from a Global Perspective: a Text Book for Use with the International Baccalaureate Economics Programme. Oxford: Glanville, 2003. Print.