Seeing is Believing
Yes, it quite appeals to reason when we say that ‘seeing is believing’. It is not at all correct for us to believe hearsay and thereby just react. This would be the corner stone of our behaviour towards what we do not see, and only hear about. This attitude can be considered as one that is very Idgical reasonable and correct. However, as with everything else, there is the other side of this reasoning. The question that now arises is that, should we believe only what we see? Here friends, comes the catch.
It is true that we should believe above all whatever we see but, if we just sit to ponder over all’ the things that we believe in and accept as truth and have never seen, the list would be very very long. It would be really hard to decide to believe only things that we see because, what we hear about, learn about every day, mostly is not seen by us. For example in our daily lives we study a lot about things that we have not seen and may not ever see. Then, do we believe about their existence or no? I think this will be taking the phrase of “seeing is believing” too far. We hear of so many places, so many people whom we never hope to see then, is it that we doubt their existence? This is thus not practical to follow to this extent. Experience tells that much of what we hear and read about we may never have a chance to see then how do we study if we do not believe all that really exists, but we are unable to see. Thus, there are umpteen things that we just have to believe. Then, is it that the adage is misdirecting us? No, it is not misleading us but, it is meant to be followed with discretion and common sense. We all have not, for example, seen England but, is there any reason for us to doubt its existence? Thus, common sense is to be the base to follow this adage ‘seeing is believing’.
In reality this adage was meant for us to take into account when we hear of scandals. ‘Seeing is believing’ would be the right attitude when we hear a scandal. We should not believe it and thus only keep quiet about it as, if we have not seen it, it can only be mischief of scandal mongering. It is for this we should not believe anything that we hear and wait to see what is said, and only then believe. If we only believe what we hear, we spread the venom of the scandal as a scandal mongering spree. Here, there is a cunning catch. In these days of modernity and scientific advancement and at the same time complete breakdown of scruples and honesty, there can be so many oddities that are talked of but, in reality do not exist. Just to malign or defame a person any number of stories can emanate from mouths that just open all the time. It is here we should follow the norm of seeing is believing. To a great extent in these malicious days, I feel that at times, even seeing need not lead to believing, as, there is so much of high drama, untruth in our environment that, we can really never assess what is right and what is wrong.
Thus, in the present day scenario, believing should only come from intuition, for the conscience within each person is God himself, and, HE cannot be wrong. Today even seeing need not mean believing as so much exists that cannot be seen and so much can be seen that does not exist.