Everyone believes things they cannot prove. The question is: How much proof is enough to warrant belief? Consider this fictional conversation between Langdon and Sophie:
Langdon: Hello. You must be Sophie Neveu. My name is Robert Langdon.
Sophie: I don’t believe you.
Langdon: Err … what reason would I have for lying?
Sophie: I don’t know. Maybe you’re crazy. Maybe you always dreamed of being a famous ?symbologist.? You made the claim. Prove it.
Langdon: Well … here’s my wallet, it has my credit cards in it, along with some pictures of me with my family …
Sophie: How do I know that’s your wallet? For all I know you could’ve mugged the real Robert Langdon and stolen his wallet.
Langdon: Okay, but here’s my driver’s license. See, it has my picture, and my name is on it … ‘Robert Langdon’.
Sophie: That could easily be faked. You could’ve bought fake documents, or you could’ve created them yourself using Photoshop or something!
Langdon: Argh. Well what about this, here’s a copy of my new book Symbols of the Lost Sacred Feminine. It has my name and photo in the back cover. Surely you wouldn’t claim this was faked!
Sophie: It still could be a faked copy of the book. Also, maybe you have an identical twin brother, and maybe he is the real Robert Langdon!
Langdon: But … I have no brother!
Sophie: Why should I believe that? Prove it.
Langdon: … adieu, Ms Neveu. Vous ?tes une imb?cile.
This is a somewhat frivolous example. But it demonstrates that everyone believes things we can?t prove 100% and that we are quite right to do so. Dan Brown claims Jesus was just a man. The earliest Christians claimed (and Christians today still claim) that Jesus was both God and man. No one’s beliefs are based on 100% proof, but instead on ?inference to the best explanation,? or put another way, deciding what is true based on the best available evidence. What kind of evidence do you require from other people? How much proof is enough? We should not pass the buck by claiming there is not enough evidence to decide; the stakes are too high, and we all must make a choice. What do you choose and why?
3 Comments
Feed for this entry
Trackback Address
June 6th, 2006 at 12:56 pm
I found the hype over The DaVinci Code to be facinating. Like everyone else I wanted to know why a novel was stirring up such serious debate.
Religion & spirituality have always been very sensative and hot button issues. This book has opened up the door to conversation not only with others, but with OURSELVES as to what we believe and why regarding some pretty deep spiritual/philisophical issues. This book has has caused us to turn inwards, and that is no small feat in today’s world of superficial distraction.
We have read or watched The DaVinci Code expecting yet another distraction from our inner selves and ended up being led to intense examination of that very thing.
To me, it’s not about being right, it’s about ASKING the questions.
June 6th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
That is very true. Well said SJG
June 6th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
The burden of proof is an interesting issue. There\’s a book that came out recently called What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty. It\’s a collection of short essays from scientists and thinkers. I find it interesting the men and women of science, the poster children for \”prove it to me in a lab and I\’ll believe you\” can also admit that there are things they believe but cannot prove. I also liked the idea of an \”Age of Certainty\”. There is easier access to more information now than ever before, but that\’s doesn\’t necessarily make us smarter, it doesn\’t even make us better informed. Interesting that will all of this info floating around it could be considered an Age of Certainty. I wonder if it\’s because we *are* certain or because we *want* to be?