To what extent do we need evidence to support our beliefs in different areas of knowledge - Essay Example

And the more the evidences are present -- evidences that are not contrary among one another -- in supporting a specific scientific belief, the more such belief becomes truthful or objective. In Bayesianism, evidences from a set of observational results for a particular hypothesis largely increase the “probability [or validity] of that hypothesis” (Achinstein 4). Furthermore, scientific belief greatly influences the person who holds such belief. Assuming that evidences validate a specific theory, the thought and action of the individual are strongly shaped by his or her belief system.

For instance, a person who considers the existence or truthfulness of the so-called global warming will express, one way or the other, his or her belief of promoting and pursuing a kind of clean and green environment. Perhaps he or she will take this action to a much higher level (e.g., mass demonstration) if such person believes that the continued apathy of the government or state concerning global warming will theoretically result an environmental catastrophe. However, evidences do not make the natural science truly objective or free from error. . But some scientists also claim that global warming does not exist; they contend that climate change or the increasing heat temperature experienced on the planet Earth is merely a natural phenomenon, which dates back to a hundred years.

Moreover, the human specie is an evolving creature that has the natural capacity to adapt in the changing environment. Interpretation to particular evidence is far from objective or scientific. A set of data does not translate to a scientific theory or law. Whether the phenomenon of global warming is true or not, interpretation or deciphering the available observable data remains to be problematic. Going away from the much politicized science (i.e., global warming), the scientists in the Middle Ages believed that the Earth was the center of the cosmos, not the sun.

Their evidence was that the common-sense perception of what they saw around them. In reply to Wittgenstein’s query, someone said, “Well, obviously, because it just looks as if the sun is going around the earth” (qtd. in Dawkins 406). Thus, interpretation matters over a set of evidences. In history as the area of knowledge, evidences or sources are very essential in verifying the truthfulness of the claim or theory made by the historian. Especially historians who study ancient civilizations, sources are necessary in order to prove that their ideas or “beliefs” are true or accurate.

And gathering a number of sources or evidences relevant to the study in question makes the historical record or writing truly comprehensive and objective. Undoubtedly, sources or evidences should be reliable (Child et al. 12). In addition, historical claim or belief influences the person’s mental