I think "seeing is believing" is meant to work as a metaphor equivalent to "the proof of the pudding is in the eating" - so, if it can be determined via the senses or other forms of evidence then it can be relied upon.
People often observe optical illusions and they see things that isn't there... If you look at yourself in a mirror on a night with no moon and your in your cellar with no light on and your blindfolded ,do you then disbelieve that your not there ..:( Am I having another blonde moment again ?
But it's dark and I've dropped it..... it's so tiny and I can't feel for it ,does it really matter if I look for it later with a huge magnifying glass. I have no proof that it even still down here and I think I might have squished it with my shoe...:(
”Seeing” in the sense of the old adage is broader than mere visual stimuli. It encompasses perception at any cognitive level. For example: It’s safe to say a very short list of people have actually seen God, yet billions believe in God. Believing is not dependent upon seeing; belief can, and often does, replace physical sight. (And reason also, but that’s another discussion)
We shouldn’t summarily dismiss a thing simply because we don’t yet understand it (Think of where we’d be as a species if we did). That we have gained a new understanding is the proper use of the adage, no?
This post was edited by Don Barzini at September 12, 2018 8:55 AM MDT
Even the most beautiful most fantastic most valuable treasure we have is in stealth mode meaning we don't see it... but yet it is there within all of life.
Nice Jugs 