Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Heightend-Awareness
The 'sound evidence' is dependant on what type of format it has to be in order for it to be credible. As evidence by one on a website can say one thing and another who has experienced it and explaining it verbally are two separate accounts. Just like if you were to believe in one system and someone else in another who has had the experience over the other. Then the latter would be questioned somewhat and the evidence still remains unsatisfactory. Only when all are aligned does any credible evidence emerge from any source be it form physical and non-physical forms become acceptable and 'sound evidence'.
|
The format of sound evidence is one where ideally there is more than a single source for the information. Ideas, thoughts, beliefs, hypotheses, theories are not necessarily sound evidence.
Even personal experiences that unshakeably persuade a single experiencer is still not evidence but the more people telling of similar experiences the more that information could be considered evidence - in my approach. For example my own speciality is afterlife but my personal experience is not evidence we survive the death of our bodies. But I can point to abundant evidence because so many other people have had similar experiences.
It's not proof but untold numbers consider it sound evidence.