2007-06-22 19:44:39 · 23 answers · asked by maryrose m 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I always verify things before believing, and I always keep an open mind.
2007-06-22 19:47:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not a yes or no question. It would depend on the source, and how reliably truthful they have been in the past. Even then, I'd have a hard time believing something outrageous or unbelievable no matter where it came from.
If any source has a reputation for stretching the truth, omitting relevant details, spouting unnecessary opinions, and generally mishandling information, then I generally assume the 'facts' I see are not complete or true, without independent verification.
2007-06-23 02:51:14 · answer #2 · answered by hypno_toad1 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if it makes sense, yes, but normally the only time i believe what i've read is when i've written it, some people like to believe what is old, in the belief that if it is old it must be right, and not that they are wrong, in a way, everything that has ever been writen is right, because it has been written by an actual living person, and it is true that that person was here and wrote it, and i'm not making any sense now so i'm just going to stop typing
2007-06-23 07:14:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's dependent on the source. If the work and source is verifible, then yes, they're believable. I tend to live by this: “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
Prince Gautama Siddharta, the founder of Buddhism
2007-06-23 02:53:27 · answer #4 · answered by Bill K Atheist Goodfella 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not a yes or no category!
There's "suspension of disbelief" for fiction, (unless it turns out to be bad fiction, in which case rubbish is so perceived)
And there's a "provisional" category, where information is accepted in the absence of any contrary indications. This includes judgement of the reliability of the source (itself open to modification).
Some categories of written information are very reliable.
I rarely disbelieve road-signs.
Popular newspapers on the other hand,
and stories flying round by e-mail...
There's this Nigerian Prince who hasn't given me millions of dollars yet.
2007-06-23 02:57:56 · answer #5 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends on where I read what I read... I could read something on a bathroom wall and nope I don't believe it , I could read something in an encyclopedia which includes cross reference to many different sources and I am much more inclined to believe it..
2007-06-23 02:48:07 · answer #6 · answered by Diane (PFLAG) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on how reliable I believe the source to be. The bible is a load of crap, while a maths book is generally very factual.
2007-06-23 05:08:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Answering this as one of 4 questions which, in essence, ask the same thing I fgive the same answer.
Surely that depends on what one is reading, does it not?
2007-06-23 05:32:16 · answer #8 · answered by alan h 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends what it is. Newspapers - no. Books in my college library - yes. Religious books - no. It has to appear logical, the most clear answer, and the most irrefutable.
2007-06-23 02:50:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on what I'm reading. Sometimes yes and sometimes no.
2007-06-23 02:47:26 · answer #10 · answered by Yogini 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋