# assertion & proof before knowledge & perception



## xuandawang

Hi, everyone:
I'm a new guy who has a difficult question to understand. Please enlighten me. The question goes as follows.

.............................................................................................

"Nothing is more discreditable than to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception."

.............................................................................................

Does "to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception" imply making prediction before having knowledge of something that might happen? 
Many thanks for your help in advance.


----------



## sunspotzsz

It means to make judgement before learning and understanding.




xuandawang said:


> Hi, everyone:
> I'm a new guy who has a difficult question to understand. Please enlighten me. The question goes as follows.
> 
> .............................................................................................
> 
> "Nothing is more discreditable than to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception."
> 
> .............................................................................................
> 
> Does "to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception" imply making prediction before having knowledge of something that might happen?
> Many thanks for your help in advance.


----------



## BODYholic

sunspotzsz said:


> It means to make judgement before learning and understanding.


Thanks sunspotzsz. I have to read something like 10x of the original quote and haven't had a clue what they were. I only have to read yours once. 感恩.


----------



## xuandawang

sunspotzsz said:


> It means to make judgement before learning and understanding.


 
Thanks for your prompt help.
Making judgment before learning and understanding implies any prediction?
According to the dictionary, prediction means saying something before it happens; judgment is a statement after a careful thought. In my thinking, prediction & pre-judgment are almost the same, at best there's
a very tiny or trivial difference between them. Am I right?


----------



## sunspotzsz

no, there are not the same. 
Prediction is neutral, but prejudgement has a negative connotation.

Hard to explain, any native English speaker want to jump in?

The original sentence was basically saying that it is not good to prejudge without know exactly what's going on or previous experience.




xuandawang said:


> Thanks for your prompt help.
> Making judgment before learning and understanding implies any prediction?
> According to the dictionary, prediction means saying something before it happens; judgment is a statement after a careful thought. In my thinking, prediction & pre-judgment are almost the same, at best there's
> a very tiny or trivial difference between them. Am I right?


----------



## w84u

I have a little haze with the word 'proof' here.


----------



## xiaolijie

> "Nothing is more discreditable than to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception."


I think it may be easier to understand if I could explain through an example:
Suppose that someone, by looking at some books in Chinese and Japanese, declared that Chinese and Japanese are similar languages (= assertion). He said that they are similar because both languages use the same writing system, with many words in common (= proof). But the truth is he's never read anything that language experts have said about either language and their relationship (= knowledge), nor does he understand or speak either language in order to see that the two are very different in many fundamental ways (= perception).


----------



## xuandawang

Many thanks for your elaborate reply. They sound reasonable.
However, on the other hand, if one has never read anything about Chinese & Japanese declared that the two languages are pretty much different from each other because of many a strange symbol & character, which he is completely unfamiliar with, although there are a lot of things looking similar & same, does he make his “assertion with simple proof precedes knowledge & perception”?
As a matter of fact, people can identify the differences & sameness between Chinese & Japanese, even if they have no clue at all about them. It seems to me that they can say something about what they have identified. Probably you will say they have made an early one-sided conclusion.
In reality, some assertion with proofs done after knowledge & perception are proved wrong. To the contrary, several predictions without proofs---I’m not so sure if there are any proofs---eventually come true as predicted or expected. Even if something is proved right at this moment, maybe in the future it will be wrong. So, I’m so confused & can hardly understand the maxim. Hopefully you can offer me more help.


----------



## xuandawang

Many thanks for your elaborate reply. They sound reasonable.
However, on the other hand, if one has never read anything about Chinese & Japanese declared that the two languages are pretty much different from each other because of many a strange symbol & character, which he is completely unfamiliar with, although there are a lot of things looking similar & same, does he make his “assertion with simple proof precedes knowledge & perception”?
As a matter of fact, people can identify the differences & sameness between Chinese & Japanese, even if they have no clue at all about them. It seems to me that they can say something about what they have identified. Probably you will say they have made an early one-sided conclusion.
In reality, some assertion with proofs done after knowledge & perception are proved wrong. To the contrary, several predictions without proofs---I’m not so sure if there is any proof---eventually come true as predicted or expected. Even if something is proved right at this moment, maybe in the future it will be wrong. So, I’m so confused & can hardly understand the maxim. Hopefully you can offer me more help.


----------



## Teach & Learn

You seem confused over the meaning of the sentence and your own philosophical perspective.


----------



## xuandawang

Teach & Learn said:


> You seem confused over the meaning of the sentence and your own philosophical perspective.


 
Frankly, due to my poor understanding, some of the answers popping up here really confused me. Seemingly, the explanation from xiaolijie is a bit easier to understand, because it gets closer to the reality. I'm trying my best to understand the core of this maxim as much as possible---to have assertion & proof precede knowledge & perception, but regretfully....... As regards "nothing is more ......", I think I can catch it. After reading yours, I became more confused. Could you please offer me several practical examples which can help me out with my confusion?


----------



## Lamb67

The OP sentence means assertion and proof are discreditable while knowlege and perception are not.
Asscertion and proof are doubtable, the others are undoubtable.


----------



## Teach & Learn

I'll rephrase the original sentence in case we are still not clear there: To have assertion and proof before gaining knowledge and perception is discreditable.

Before I give further explanation, would you give us some clue of where you quoted the sentence and what context it is?


----------



## xuandawang

Lamb67 said:


> The OP sentence means assertion and proof are discreditable while knowlege and perception are not.
> Asscertion and proof are doubtable, the others are undoubtable.


 
Thanks for your reply. However, I have no clue why you made the conclusion of "doubtable & undoubtable". Actually most of the people have experienced & known that  doubtable & undoubtable things are relative, they can be changed or transformed as time goes by, even they're interchangeable.
As far as I know, a lot of things that were considered correct & right long before are proved wrong at present or in the future, or vice versa. 
Even if the assertion & proof are doubtful like you said, after they are proved correct, will they still be doubtful? So do the things undoubtable?!
Besides, in my thinking, the author wants people not to make assertion & proof go ahead of knowledge & perception. Assertion & proof are not 'discreditable' unless they go first---according to the speaker.


----------



## xuandawang

Teach & Learn said:


> I'll rephrase the original sentence in case we are still not clear there: To have assertion and proof before gaining knowledge and perception is discreditable.
> 
> Before I give further explanation, would you give us some clue of where you quoted the sentence and what context it is?


 
I got this old saying from a friend of mine, who told me it had been quoted from Cicero's maxims. However, I tried to find it in the website of Cicero, but I failed. There are a lot of his famous sayings, but unfortunately this one does not exist. Maybe I need to do more searching job elaborately & carefully .
Thank you again in advance for helping me out with confusion.


----------



## xuandawang

Thank you all guys for your help as well as your idea & thought, though they didn't seem to enlighten me much.
I'm gonna retreat & no longer take part in the discussion anymore after I've read a report in which goes this sentence: "幻想、推算、假设任何东西，那是个人爱好，至于别人愿意信还是不信，那就是别人的事了。", and also I got a piece of advice from my relative: "The beauty is in the eye of the beholder"/ There is no accounting for taste.

So, no matter how great the philosopher may be, how important & famous his saying might be, everyone has his own judgment on whether it is true & acceptable, much more individual understanding of its real meaning.


----------



## Lamb67

For example Cicero's works were just assertion and proof when he wrote them, but with time passing, today his works are still enjoyable and ultimately proved to be knowlege and perception.
A definition of knowlege:
Statements about truth must be viewed skeptically. Rather than state something as "true," the following phrase should be used: "On the evidence available today the balance of probability favors the view that..." (V. Gordon Childe, _Man Makes Himself_, 1936) , and you can read it as the modern version of Cicero's words.


----------



## Teach & Learn

xuandawang said:


> So, no matter how great the philosopher may be, how important & famous his saying might be, everyone has his own judgment on whether it is true & acceptable, much more individual understanding of its real meaning.



I think you got what I meant earlier.


----------



## xuandawang

Since everyone has his own point of view, personal understanding, as well as various consciousness, the world is as diverse as a kaleidoscope. So, there is no need to stick to a simple idea or thought that seems specious (if one thinks it is).

Cicero was likely to condemn himself of being discreditable??? I doubt.


*For example Cicero's works were just assertion and proof when he wrote them, but with time passing, today his works are still enjoyable and ultimately proved to be knowlege and perception.


----------



## Lamb67

My previous post didn't make sense, I am sorry about it. 

Knowlege and perception are more creditable than assertion and proof, that's a translation into plain English. Everyone should feel easy and a relief now.


----------



## xuandawang

Hi, Lamb67:
本已断念继续探索西氏格言，因仁者见仁，智者见智，各有所好。今见
阁下勇于坦言有所缺失，令在下不胜钦羡。当今几许英才、名人（包括
鄙人蠢才在内）甘愿坦承不当？？？！！！即便推卸不得，还得例
据举众多无法自圆其说的缘由，以期找人垫背，或自身图遁。
因见阁下与众不同，不禁赞赏不已。若不嫌在下低微，愿交阁下为笔友，以利互勉互励。特此致敬。


----------



## Lamb67

Thanks, Let's enjoy knowlege and perception and try to discern assertion and proof.


----------

