• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain the difference between knowing something and believing something

Extracts from this document...


Explain the difference between knowing something and believing something Something doesn't have to be true to be believable. People say lies and people believe them. There are things out, such as God, which there is no actually evidence to his/her being real, but for years people believe there is one. You can't stop someone believing something. Back in Columbus's day, people didn't even believe about the world being anything but flat, until Columbus proved it. He had evidence, it was proved that the world was, in actually fact, sphere. In this essay, I am going to show how believing something and knowing something is different and try explain the differences. The characteristics of knowledge are that it must be true; knowledge can't be knowledge if there is any doubt in any of it. ...read more.


Belief is something that someone wants to believe, whether it's true or not. There are two main types of philosophers, i) Empiricism - where philosophers believe that knowledge comes from our senses ii) Rationalism - where philosophers believe that knowledge comes through from our reasons and thoughts Some say that Empiricism is not a good way to believe where our knowledge comes from. Our senses can deceive us, for example, when we think we see someone we know on the street and wave to them, but our eyes have deceived us, because it isn't who we thought it was. Our thoughts are part of our knowledge, if we had no thoughts, we wouldn't have knowledge of anything, because we couldn't think about them. ...read more.


However, there are some arguments that can just be straightforward and true, for example, "I did not have mothballs for dinner last night", I know this, it was in the past, it has happened, I was there when I ate my dinner, I know that I had a curry, not mothballs, I know there is a difference between what mothballs are and what my curry looked like. This is a justified statement; I believe it, I know it is true and I saw the evidence. It is impossible to know something, which is yet to happen in the future. It may not happen - there could be a snowstorm tonight, which prevents you go out and doing what you intended, or the world might end tomorrow, so obviously you won't be able to what you wanted. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. T H E D E S I G N A R ...

    Philo strengthens his argument by another point: 4. Animal adaptation cannot be used to prove a designer of animals since if they did not adapt to their environment they would not survive. It is not legitimate to use what could not be otherwise as evidence of intelligent planning.

  2. What is Knowledge? Explain and Illustrate

    'A Prioi' Knowledge Unlike propositional knowledge and knowledge associated with skills, 'A Prioi' knowledge is not dependant upon experience, as it has no existential content, examples of this are mathematics, some very simple examples being '2 + 2 = 4' or '6 + 5 = 11'.

  1. Extreme Rationalism

    After this work was published Galileo invented the telescope and confirmed the findings of Copernicus and suddenly people had the beginnings of the possibility of an explanation of the natural world that did not depend on God. This is the beginning of empirical science as we know it.

  2. Compare the respective approaches of rationalism and empiricism towards a theory of knowledge ...

    Body - Corporeal So the question turned to be, "How can something incorporeal, interact wit something corporeal?" Empiricism Empiricists went against the ideas of the rationalists, about innate ideas.

  1. There is No Way of Knowing What God is like

    Humans often see God as a fatherly figure. Whether this view point has been influenced by parents and upbringings or personal knowledge and decisions, it is almost always true. A study of believers in God showed that when asked to describe God, most people said "like a father - caring, loving and forgiving".

  2. Can we know something that has not yet been proven true?

    I have personally come across a discussion relating the 'seeing is believing' theory, and this happened in religion class, where the students were asked to debate on the available evidence of God's existence.

  1. 'Can we know something that has not yet been proven true?'

    his house as I have justified his presence inside his house by seeing him. False proof therefore will bring false knowledge, as it justifies false beliefs. As with the argument of the existence of god. Some believe in the existence of a God.

  2. "By discovering something new, a character can change for the better." Is this ...

    The use of gripping discourse between the two main characters (Luisa and her author) induces a tense atmosphere within the story that heightens as the reader learns more and more about Lusia's life and the tragedy within it. However, before Luisa discovers the secret to the story of her life

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work