It’s called extending your judgment beyond the evidence. That’s what people who study such things as certitude will tell you. They study why it is that we are certain about some things and not so certain about other things.
And they say that sometimes you can be certain about something without much evidence. And then there are other times we’re not certain about something despite overwhelming evidence.
When it comes to being certain about things, there are skeptics who may not be certain about anything. And there are cynics who don’t want to be certain about things even if they’re feeling it could be.
And then on the other side of certainty, there are those who are certain about everything. And rarely are convinced otherwise.
In the legal world, being certain is not always easy. Jurors are supposed to make decisions beyond a reasonable doubt, not any doubt.
And in the world of politics, being certain depends on which side you’re on and what you’re certain about.
Lots of Democrats say they are certain President Trump has done bad things.
Lots of Republicans say they are certain Hillary Clinton has done bad things.
And when it comes to U.S senate candidate Roy Moore, there are those who are certain he did what he’s accused of doing and there are those who are certain he didn’t do it and it’s a plot.
One thing’s for certain. Being certain is sometimes less about evidence and more about politics.
(Photo credit Getty Images)