“Provability is a weaker concept than truth. » suggests that provability, that is, proving a theory with evidence, is not necessarily better than truth which, in the case of science, draws the conclusions of scientists, philosophers or any scientific expert , which go beyond the evidence provided. In this essay, the main focus would be on paradigm shift, evidence and knowledge claim. The thesis underlying the essay is that people are inclined to employ simple means to explain and justify their theories or beliefs and experiences, and it is often difficult for others to realize that their perceptions of order and evidence may be totally different from the whole. truth. Then, notions of blind faith would be explored as well as the contradiction between religion and science. This would be done by analyzing ways of knowing; faith and how atheist claims suggest that people with religious faith escape the facts and prefer to live in a fairy tale. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The story of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon is an example where the evidence was absolutely different from the truth. As the question states "beyond evidence", it is essential to contextualize that evidence is a type of evidence that provides concrete data to support an idea. But what happens when the evidence provided goes beyond prior knowledge about the product? The location of the legendary place has caused doubt among people due to lack of evidence. Therefore, knowledge production has been limited due to lack of evidence and a paradigm shift has occurred due to new evidence. The proximity of one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World – the Hanging Garden of Babylon – remains a huge mystery. Archaeologists have been unable to find traces of Babylon, leading people to doubt its existence. However, after 18 years of extensive study, an archaeologist from the University of Oxford, Stephanie Dalley, discovered that the garden was built by the Assyrians, who are located in northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq), and that the obsolete location was probably in the south, created by the enemies of the Assyrians - by the Babylonians. Recently, the British scholar provided textual evidence that the garden was instead created in Nineveh, 300 miles from Babylon. Before Dr. Stephanie, not a single archaeologist had risked their life to travel to Mosul to find evidence of the garden's location. One of the accounts mentioned above claims that it was created by King Nebuchadnezzar, 600 years before the birth of Christ. However, in the writings of the time, none of them mentioned a garden, so archaeologists before Dr. Stephanie simply assumed that it was created by the Babylonians in Babylon. Contemporary discoveries suggest that what everyone thought about the precise location of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon was wrong, but before Dr. Stephanie's excavations and the search for new evidence, the location that is the conclusion drawn by historians and Previous archaeologists were wrong and they drew conclusions. without having clear evidence to support their conjecture. To understand the underlying thesis in more detail, it is important to understand what knowledge production is and how it is accepted without evidence. According to Plato, knowledge is defined as “true and justified belief”. A modern definition of knowledge is "the ideas orunderstandings that an entity possesses and which are used to take effective action to achieve the entity's objectives. Comparing the two definitions, the differences suggest that the definition of knowledge has changed in recent years. Likewise, the way we collect evidence has also changed, and scientists do not conclude their theories in the absence of evidence and the equipment used to acquire knowledge has also changed. Many years ago, experts and philosophers relied largely on "word of mouth" to conduct their research, but today scientific knowledge is obtained differently. Evidence is essential to have concrete proof, and the two areas of knowledge of natural sciences and humanities would be explored, and the path of knowledge explored is reasoning. Reasoning allows humans to have stable mental states, because without reasoning certain aspects of our life, we will enter a state of abyss where doubt heavily controls us. “God Is Not Great,” a book by Christopher Hitchens, explores the notion of faith in God. With the saying “blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in spite of the evidence”. by Richard Dawkins Atheism has grown in importance as these dogmatic statements allow readers to question the validity of the religion. Humanities and reason prove these dogmatic claims, as it could be argued that people who have faith in religion are often unaware of facts and evidence, and some claim that they live in a fantasy world detached from reality. Regardless of our beliefs regarding God, Allah, etc., we believe in things that cannot be proven and we are obligated to believe in their reliability. Faith is like undergoing critical surgery: you have no evidence of safe surgery; whether the procedure will go smoothly. In the same way, when placing our faith in Christ or Allah or whatever religion others believe, as humans we must rely on evidence such as the Quran. This also implies that in religion we infer from abstract evidence given to us and come to conclusions that go beyond the evidence. On the other hand, humanities can also be considered religion. As Darwin said: “Science also needs faith before it can have reasons. » This suggests that science and religion share a similar epistemological status. Indeed, religion is a type of knowledge and it can cooperate with science and supplant it. Although religions do not include proofs such as being a witness to God, a myriad of people have faith in their religion. Without a doubt, science and religion are different, but they are thought of and contextualized in completely different ways. The main difference is that science has the capacity to enable rational thought; where concepts can be analyzed via surveys and tests. In physics, there is a branch of study called theoretical physics which involves the study of concepts and theories that do not require concrete proofs or conclusions. Considering string theory, one might ask whether string theory is actually a science or a philosophical position? This is a long-standing debate between physicists and philosophers. Recently, at the University of Munich in Germany, a meeting was held with experts and they evaluated whether string theory is considered a science. Now, “if a theory is sufficiently elegant and explanatory, it does not need to be tested experimentally.”.