A two-year-old girl may doubt that fire is hot and dangerous. Verbal evidence would have already been given to her by that age by her parents or the adults around her. Visual evidence would have been given by television; television or commercials show people touching fire, and getting hurt. Those pieces of evidence would only suit the girl for a short amount of time. After the allotted amount of time, the girl would want to experience fire first-hand. The child will realize that fire is hot and dangerous once it burns her. Certainty has now set-in. When the girl grows up, she will forever know that fire is hot and can possibly hurt her. Any claim who contradicts her experience, she will have doubt it.
From past experiences, she has established, certainly, that fir is hot. Doubt is elicited in the opposing statement, when a claim opposes all evidence she has received. Doubt and certainty are both present and are aware of each other. Doubt and Certainty do not have to be on the same claim, but inhabit the same idea. A lawyer draws conclusions to create certainty or doubt. They use deceptive tactics to detour accusations and relate to sympathy of the jury. An objective jury is nonexistent. Jury’s are influenced by characteristics (emotions, reason, ethos, appearance) of a lawyer.
A lawyer may elicit emotions from their client to give reason for harsh actions that the client has committed. A lawyer wants to create doubt in the jury’s mind. As the prosecutor attempts to paint a horrid picture of a defendant, the defending lawyer must create doubt. The defense lawyer wants the jury to doubt the accusations claimed by the prosecutor. Doubt is the key to the defense lawyers’ strategy. The prosecutor has already made the jury certain the defendant was guilty. It is the defense lawyer’s job to create doubt to win the case. The defense lawyer wants the jury to doubt the prosecutor.
Without certainty, the defense lawyer cannot create doubt. The lawyer provided not only verbal evidence, but also visible evidence. That evidence would cause doubt winning the case. To win the case, the same could be said for the prosecutor, doubt cannot prosper without certainty. Certainty and doubt co-exist. A magician uses the faults of the eyes to create certainty, and then astonishes their audience with something that was unlikely going to happen. They require visible evidence to trick their audience. A magician will use diversion or distraction to captivate their audience. Then, reveal an opposite outcome to bewilder their audience. Their purpose is to captivate and intrigue the audience, which will happen when the audience’s confidence in their eyes and certainty is diminished.
Certainty must be present, for the magician to astound his audience when the outcome is different than what the audience expected. The audiences’ certainty relies on common sense. Common sense has been practiced throughout their life, so there would be no reason to doubt their conclusion when visual evidence has been demonstrated before their eyes. The magician relies on the certainty of the audience to trick them. Doubt will introduce itself, when common sense and visual evidence has failed them. Doubt will, eventually, be present because of certainty.
After many trials of the audience’s incorrect assumptions, they doubt will their senses. Magicians need doubt and certainty to co-exist (as they do) to succeed in their illusions. Doubt and certainty are present in all scenarios. They depend on each other to make the best outcome. Visual evidence, verbal evidence, or experience all support doubt and certainty. Visual evidence and experience are not as easy be control or sway with bias. Verbal evidence is the easiest the control. Saying something in one way may influence some ones doubt or certainty. Doubt and certainty co-exist.