CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Doubt is not necesarilly a form of trust. If your friend claims he can predict the number of coins in your pocket, you doubt that he can, but there's a chance he could, so you don't trust that he can't. There's no trust here, only doubt, you doubt both possibilities.
Infact, this can be said about any scenario involving probability and prediction. Say there's P chance of an event happening, your friend predicts it will happen. You doubt that his prediction is right, but there's still a very real chance that his prediction is right, so you neither trust that he's right nor that he's wrong.
I was once unsure about whether anyone would take me up on the challenge, so I didn't say I was absolutely sure, I said that I trusted that no one would. (in other words I doubted anyone would)
I no longer have any trust/doubt on the matter, as absolute certainty has been reached. It seems to me that my opponents so far (you included) in this debate are equating trust with absolute certainty.
If your friend claims he can predict the number of coins in your pocket, you doubt that he can, but there's a chance he could, so you don't trust that he can't. There's no trust here, only doubt, you doubt both possibilities.
I have some trust that he could succeed, and some that he could fail. I trust that both are possibilities. If I doubt that it's likely, I am trusting to some degree that it's not likely.
Infact, this can be said about any scenario involving probability and prediction. Say there's P chance of an event happening, your friend predicts it will happen. You doubt that his prediction is right, but there's still a very real chance that his prediction is right, so you neither trust that he's right nor that he's wrong.
My trust might tend toward the affirmative of a proposition, or more to the negative, or I may be relatively neutral. When my trust shifts toward the negative of a proposition we call it doubt, but it is trust to the contrary.
I do not agree. Even Jesus had doubts and He was perfect. Not one single person on this earth currently is perfect in any way. Trusting God means loving Him even if you do not understand Him.
These positions are by no means mutually exclusive. In fact doubt is actually an increase in a type of certainty. for example when I doubt that my food is cooked well, I become somewhat more certain (trusting) that it isn't
Try putting it in a sentence. Might make things clearer. :/
I doubt that you are you going to the park with me.
I trust that you are not going to the park with me.
The second sentence can either put trust in the speaker or to the other person....which is the debate's question.
To the speaker: I trust in myself that you are not going to the park with me.
To the other person: I trust in you that you are not going to the park with me.
I don't speak like that (The sentence just above "To the other person") so that is why I am having trouble with this debate. Putting trust into someone to do something negative is odd to think. But I will bet it is an unnoticeable common. Um....
Lets say your husband cheats on you constantly and it breaks your heart badly. Now think about this because I think I have something. The person you love has just changed before your eyes. As if he or she is a new person. You are chained to the relationship and just have to accept the new person who he or she is. So when your love says that he or she is going on a business trip...your mind will automatically doubt that your love is actually going on a business trip and instead pursue an affiar. And your mind will accept your love as a new person and say "I trust IN YOU that you are having an affair."
Yes she becomes doubtful that her husband is not going to a "business trip."
"But now she claims to be certain of it by claiming she trusts that judgment."
Yes she becomes certain of the doubt by trusting in the doubt or her doubtful judgment.
"So she comes to the conclusion of trust because the doubt is gone."
No. She trusts that the doubt is there. She has become certain of the uncertain.
"Doubt is still not a form of trust."
It seems contradictory to say that one can be uncertain and certain at the same time. It makes sense to me. If one person becomes uncertain of something, that is like saying that you are you certain of your uncertain thought. In other words, you trust yourself to believe something is uncertain.
Like...if I showed you an apple and told you it was an orange...you will probably laugh. You will be most likely certain that the apple IS NOT an orange and that I am a complete idiot. At the same time, you trust your doubt because you trust your experiences. And it is your experiences or knowledge that tells you that what you see is an apple.
doubt+evidence(anything that convinces you)=trust.
If she really believes that he isn't going on the trip, then it isn't doubt.
Something has convinced her to trust that he isn't going on the business trip.
You can trust that you are uncertain, but that does not make the uncertain certain.
doubt is neutral basically.
Like...if I showed you an apple and told you it was an orange...you will probably laugh. You will be most likely certain that the apple IS NOT an orange and that I am a complete idiot. This isn't doubt then.
At the same time, you trust your doubt because you trust your experiences. And it is your experiences or knowledge that tells you that what you see is an apple.
So in order to win this argument i have to show that trust can bring doubt. :)
hmmmmmmm
So let me create a scenario i like to use: A man cheats on his wife.
Merriam webster states that trust is: "belief that someone or something is reliable, good, honest, effective, etc."
So a woman sees a suspicious text message on her husband's phone and suspects or trusts that the text is something reliable to determine that her husband is actually cheating.
Merriam webster states that doubt is: "to be uncertain about (something) : to believe that (something) may not be true or is unlikely"
So basically if she trusts the text message to be something reliable, she also believe at that time and moment that the text not being reliable is unlikely.
I honestly think it is... For example, i doubt the american government for what it stands for. If you don't trust someone it's still a form of trust, just untrust.
Well, that makes perfekt sense... So to recap, you untrust the American government because you doubt what it stands for, therefore you trust it, er, I mean untrust it... Did I get that right? Somehow, I doubt it! :)
The opposite (or lack) of something is not a form of it. Light is white and the color black is the absence of light. Although both are considered colors by most, black is not a "form" of light. (And no, blacklight is not black- it's purple/ultraviolet).
Impossible to FULLY trust them, I'll grant. What you propose however, does not allow for levels of trust. The implication that once there is some doubt, that this destroys all trust, is misleading.
Without knowing what trsut is, you wouldn't be able to comprehend, untruthfulness. Theres a balance, every word has it's opposing word. They exist off one another, So (IMO) distrust is a form of trust.
darkness is a form of light, there is always visibility. Meaning there is always light. Just a lighter, shade doesn't really create the perception of actual darkness.
You can only be sure that I didn't prove it to everybody. Some found my arguments convincing, and some found yours convincing. As I think you are aware, proof consists merely of what is convincing.
I look at it like doubt is a form/fuction of trust. I posted this debate looking for challenges to the way I think about it. That I haven't persuaded you to look at it differently is clear, but you haven't changed my mind either. I can see your arguments as being convincing to many, but they don't convince me.
What are you trying to say? That doubt is just a low level of trust?
That's ludicrous.
No, it's more like a shifting of trust toward an alternate position. I think you may have convinced me that an improvement to the OP would be "Doubt is a function of trust"
You should go and get the proper credentials so that you can alter the meaning of the word.
Nah, I'd rather just have a conversation with those in charge, and exert my influence that way.
Sure, but first, will you admit that one can doubt the veracity of proposition X, to a certain degree, and still hold X as more likely to be true than proposition Y?
I ask you where the bag of weed is. You tell me that it's in the kitchen. After a minute of searching the kitchen I begin to have some doubt that the bag is in the kitchen, but I keep looking because despite having doubt, I'm still inclined to believe it's in the kitchen somewhere that I haven't looked.
As I begin to doubt that the bag is in the kitchen, I am redirecting my trust. I am not ceasing to trust, I am only changing the way that I trust. Like all trust, doubt is but another form of self trust.
Man that really stings. You just made me look so stupid, I'm probably going to be too ashamed to post on CreateDebate anymore. I bow before your word meaning expertise.
If "a" and "b" were not opposite then "b" would mean "I am sure she isn't lying.", but they are opposite.
I am seeing Trust and Doubt as antonyms in a thesaurus, so I am going with that.
I haven't persuaded you in the slightest from what I can tell, so indulge me if you will, so I can try to expose the flaw in the popular logic. A simple question.
Do you believe that it's possible to trust without being absolutely sure?
You cannot turn a light on and off at the same time, because on and off are truly opposite. You CAN trust and doubt at the same time because trust and doubt are not truly opposite. Doubt is trust in the opposite direction if you will.
Damn you are hard to persuade, and you make convincing arguments.
I trust that.....I will live until tomorrow morning
I "weakly" doubt that.......I will live until tomorrow morning
I simultaneously trust AND doubt that I will live until tomorrow morning.
I am trusting and doubting at the same time about whether I'll live until tomorrow morning. This covers the "same time and same respect" clause of the law of non-contradiction.
Even if doubt and trust are not opposites, then that still does not make doubt a form of trust.
Trust is the absence of doubt. Trust means you feel like you are certain. Doubt means you feel like you are uncertain. If you say you trust something, but still say you have some doubts, then you really still doubt out. It doesn't matter what you say or how you say it.
Even if doubt and trust are not opposites, then that still does not make doubt a form of trust.
Granted. What makes doubt a form of trust is that doubt is trust in an opposing proposition.
Trust is the absence of doubt. Trust means you feel like you are certain. Doubt means you feel like you are uncertain.
If it's impossible to trust without being ABSOLUTELY certain, then my argument falls apart. If it is possible to be EVEN SLIGHTLY doubtful regarding a proposition that you generally trust, than your argument falls apart.
Do you agree with this? (I trust that you won't answer this directly with a yes or no...in other words, I doubt you will)
"Logical flaws are hard to expose, without the aid of yeses and nos" ~atypican
"Knowing", is the absence of trust and doubt.
Careful what you admit sir, it looks like you agree here. Remember, simply saying I have a point is not an option. :)
Right after (tellingly) not answering the following question (below in bold) with a yes or no.
Do you believe that it's possible to trust without being absolutely sure?
You have yet to agree further than admitting they can be done at the same time. I am still working on convincing you that one can both doubt and trust the exact same proposition.
While you could say that doubt is a form of trust, in that you're trusting your own instincts and experience over the thing you doubt....
That's really just playing with semantics. You could argue that cold is a form of heat (as the term cold just indicates a temperature below a somewhat arbitrary threshold), and be somewhat correct in a technical sense, but it's still wrong insofar as understanding of heat is concerned- while it is scientifically a measure of kinetic energy at the molecular level, when people talk about hot and cold they're talking about relative to the norm, specific measurements of energy be damned.
Trust, as you say, might be positive (trust) or negative (untrust). Can it apply to believing? Believing is same as unbelieving to a certain extent. It seems like a funny word play to me. Fairly interesting how the words' meanings make the statement more important without the importance of context. Imagine how many words are out there, but the argue around here is dedicated directly to those two. But the context can't be ignored since words are meant to make sense and send a message to the receiver in a conversation. it's easy as bad is bad and good is good. Only one decision is left to decide, what is bad and good. And that decision is different to all people. e.g. Say out loud a bad joke to someone involving a dirty joke. And watch how many different people will react. - Now what I just said is my opinion and . So the two words trust and untrust signify the same definition only one negatively and the other positively. So with context these words get applied into action and describe certain obvious things, or unobvious if you're in a doubt. Being in between them, the decision between true and false, bad and good,believe and disbelieve. Just being unsure. English dictionary was created, and began to develop and still develops. And the words have a certain meaning. Choose your vocabulary and stick with it. But keep in mind that most people will speak how they were thought. So just stick with the language. - And I might be wrong. Explain why I could be? Cheers.
I kind of don't get this. If you have doubt that someone can do something you aren't exactly trusting them completely. Since you doubt them. I'll give an example invade this doesn't make sense :) If I was asked to do something an the person who asked didnt have a doubt in their mind that I could do it it's showing trust but if they asked me to do it and they still had doubts its bit showing a lot of trust, if that makes sense? :/