# Crede Ut Intellegas

I occasionally see sceptics. People who always require a rigorous
proof. They have to prove before proceeding.

I'm not going to say that rigorous proofs are worthless. We need
strong foundations. But in the end, it is just another tool. It
should not be the purpose. The purpose should be truth.


You should believe first. Prove later. If you believe, you will
have a selection bias. With the bias, you can easily get evidences.
You can interpret this as [Theory] = [Sense] too. Believing is
ironically a kind of experimentalism.

If there aren't people who irrationally believe in heliocentrism
first, we can never get the counterevidences of geocentrism easily.
Requiring a proof beforehand means examining heliocentrism with a
geocentric lense. Even if you don't agree, you should try a new
lense first.


By believing first, you can have a bigger picture before proving.
A bigger picture usually leads to a simpler result. You could know
what are just mundane details. And what are not.