Certainty vs doubt
Certainty and doubt co-exist. The is no doubt without certainty (vice versa). The growth of the idea may be swayed by evidence (verbal, visible, or experience). Verbal evidence is not always credible and relies on the character of the person speaking; however, the speaker may conceal or twist the truth around to arrive at a logical point of view, therefore any person may believe the persons point. Lawyers, magicians, and politicians use pieces of the truth to direct certainty or doubt about their subjects. Certainty and doubt lies within an athlete’s own mind; it creates a drive that keeps them going. Belief holds certainty and doubt together.
Certainty and doubt comes from experience. A two-year-old girl may doubt that fire is hot and dangerous. Verbal evidence would have already been given to her by that age by her parents or the adults around her. Visual evidence would have been given by television; television or commercials show people touching fire, and getting hurt. Those pieces of evidence would only suit the girl for a short amount of time. After the allotted amount of time, the girl would want to experience fire first-hand. The child will realize that fire is hot and dangerous once it burns her. Certainty has now set-in. When the girl grows up, she will forever know that fire is hot and can possibly hurt her. Any claim who contradicts her experience, she will have doubt it. From past experiences, she has established, certainly, that fir is hot. Doubt is elicited in the opposing statement, when a claim opposes all evidence she has received. Doubt and certainty are both present and are aware of each other. Doubt and Certainty do not have to be on the same claim, but inhabit the same idea.
A lawyer draws conclusions to create certainty or doubt. They use deceptive tactics to detour accusations and relate to sympathy of the jury. An objective jury is nonexistent. Jury’s are influenced by characteristics (emotions, reason, ethos, appearance) of a lawyer. A
Certainty and doubt comes from experience. A two-year-old girl may doubt that fire is hot and dangerous. Verbal evidence would have already been given to her by that age by her parents or the adults around her. Visual evidence would have been given by television; television or commercials show people touching fire, and getting hurt. Those pieces of evidence would only suit the girl for a short amount of time. After the allotted amount of time, the girl would want to experience fire first-hand. The child will realize that fire is hot and dangerous once it burns her. Certainty has now set-in. When the girl grows up, she will forever know that fire is hot and can possibly hurt her. Any claim who contradicts her experience, she will have doubt it. From past experiences, she has established, certainly, that fir is hot. Doubt is elicited in the opposing statement, when a claim opposes all evidence she has received. Doubt and certainty are both present and are aware of each other. Doubt and Certainty do not have to be on the same claim, but inhabit the same idea.
A lawyer draws conclusions to create certainty or doubt. They use deceptive tactics to detour accusations and relate to sympathy of the jury. An objective jury is nonexistent. Jury’s are influenced by characteristics (emotions, reason, ethos, appearance) of a lawyer. A