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

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree?

Extracts from this document...


?That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.? (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree? The idiom, ?seeing is believing? has been inspiring the human race of how powerful evidence is in shaping our beliefs. Therefore, it is a norm in the human culture that any information must embody explicit evidence before it can only be said as true. The same conception was proposed by Christopher Hitchens as he quoted, ?that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence?. I personally believe that this statement is a false analogy and is rhetorical as it is persuasive in demanding people to perceive in a one-way manner. Knowledge covers various fields and grounds, with each ground constitute different measures in order to validate information as a source of knowledge. In other words, the need of evidence may also differ between areas of knowledge. Hence, to justify my assumption on the statement quoted by Christopher Hitchens, thoughts with consideration of counter-arguments are assembled to address the relevance of evidence in natural science and religion. Living in the millennium century has enabled us to witness numerous scientific discoveries have been made by scientists. From one of the biggest breakthrough in chemistry through the uncovering of the atomic theory by John Dalton to the controversial theory of evolution proposed by Charles Darwin, scientific discoveries has significantly contribute to how we see and perceive the world today. ...read more.


As I come to think about it, observations in natural science are much influenced by our expectation. Einstein as a reputable scientist is well-respected and his ideas will usually gain attention from the science community as he is highly-regarded as a genius due to his incredible range of theoretical physics publication in the early 1900s. Hence, as we are confident of his findings, we tend to believe that the theory is true without the need of being justified. Clearly, the science community is actually making an ad hominem fallacy. The flaw of natural science through the treatment of double standard shifts the question to be, does the need of evidence in assertions are subjective in natural science? I personally believe that, each assertion deserves an equal treatment of being validate before being dismissed as Richard van de Lagemaat quoted, many scientific discoveries are counter-intuitive and go against untutored common sense. Logically, as the need of evidence is arguably important in natural science, the same must go to other areas of knowledge, including religion. Nevertheless, proofs of the existence of God are just too vague that they can be easily dismissed by skeptics. While skeptics based their argument of this matter, Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid explained that there are actually three categories of evidence which proves the existence of God, which are the instinctive evidence, tangible evidence and revelatory evidence. ...read more.


(Christina, 2009), are they abusing the word ?faith? in order to protect religion from the conception that each assertion must be supported with observable evidence? From the knower?s perspective, it could not be agreed more that the need of evidence in religion is indeed vague, thus, I personally believe that a fine line must be drawn in order to distinguish reliable assertions and unreliable assertions. As natural science demands empirical evidence before any assertions can be made, religion has always been associated with metaphysical claims which differ itself from other areas of knowledge. It has been made clear that both areas of knowledge deserve different treatment towards any assertions without evidence. Nevertheless, I believe that the individual who asserts the claim plays a major role in how we evaluate the claim. In natural science for instance, an individual who is highly-regarded in the field of which he is making the claim on, would know what he is asserting. Thus, if this is this case, even if the claim made has no evidence, it is very likely that the claim would be true. The same applies to religion. In a nutshell, reason must be put in front of other ways of knowing when evaluating any assertions. Only by doing this, our decision would be rational and any biasness could be avoided. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge 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 International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. People Need To Believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events

    In a way, both of these are ways to avoid chaos and our need for order. Planning our life and thinking a step ahead, which would be hard with no direction or history, seems to be a need we have which without we would not last long in this life.

  2. One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence ...

    people catch fire without source of ignition, and burn at temperatures high enough to burn bones, but do not damage their surroundings. Therefore though current technology may not be able to pinpoint the reason why miracles happen, future knowledge may be able to.

  1. Imagine a world without colours

    Finally the sun was back, but everything was changed. The colors were washed away with the rain leaving the world black, white and dull shades of grey. The light of the sun became brighter but the king could not feel the heat.

  2. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). ...

    This shows that statements opposing the current paradigms, despite being true, are held wrong, showing that knowledge is dependent on belief. If beliefs are justified, meaning that there is adequate concrete evidence, then it becomes knowledge. So what about phenomenon that are true but not believed?

  1. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence Discuss.

    Since Freud there have been many theories applied on the development of behavior and it?s analyzing. However the main ingredient in determining these theories is emotion. The measurement of emotional reactions, determines cognition in psychology. It can be up to a level where the determination of it relies on analyzing emotions.

  2. The Need for Evidence to Support Claims

    This is the reason I still listen to Radiohead and the reason I stopped listening to Laura Veirs in middle school. Why I liked it before didn?t seem to have an answer but neither did my sudden distaste for

  1. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). ...

    Atheists deny the presence of any divine reality because they have no evidence that proves the existence of a god. However, their belief that there is no god also has no evidence and yet they cling to it. Therefore based on intuitive and emotional impulses knowers either believes or disbelieves

  2. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    though, people do not need proof to be aware about their love towards someone else. Once again, this is what people assume about loving someone, but is it true? Here is the part where we go back to Hitchen?s quote where he expresses the importance of evidence regarding suppositions.

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