...Belief can exist without proof; but it must emphatically avoid proof to remain belief....
“...Belief can exist without proof; but it must emphatically avoid proof to remain belief....”
Maybe, but belief is based upon education level and provision of examples until the example is allowed to existence. (Saul Alinsky) If something is said enough in the public domain, it becomes fact because people don’t care unless it effects them. So if I tell you I saw something that is against the grain of people with an agenda, they will attack the messenger after they can’t disprove the fact I saw it. So direct proof itself is based upon the perception of what is talked about, not what I saw.
A perfect example are the groups coming out now trying to disclaim the holocaust. There are names, documents, displays, pictures, knowledgeable relatives....more than enough evidence to proof it’s existence. But some are trying to gain traction in the media, all who weren’t even born when it happened, to verbally, only, with far outgunned proof, to say it didn’t happen. But that’s the chance you take when you erase logic, to include proof, and substitute it with antipathy of the messenger and not disproof of the occurrence. Perception is a two sided sword with one side sharper than the other. And that depends on who is sharpening it, not the sword.