His Eminence Al-Shak

What is meant by “the virtue of doubt”? Positive doubt, which does not lead to rejection or nihilism, but to posing questions and seeking answers that satisfy the mind—i.e., “doubt that leads to certainty.” There is a difference between “absolute truth” and humanity’s limited capacity to attain it; here, doubt is a methodological tool for questioning assumptions, not for denying meaning. Doubt has always been the key to knowledge and the unveiling of the obscure. Had it not been for doubt, we would not, for example, know what we might find if our oceanic exploration continued, nor would we have discovered new worlds and continents. Thanks to skeptical adventurers who sought, for instance, to discover the source of the rivers that have carved through our cities for millennia—without any of us asking ourselves: Where does all this water come from? Why is doubt considered a “virtue” in certain fields? In the scientific method, the virtue lies in continuous doubt through the formulation of hypotheses and conclusions, because biases can mislead research for decades if left unchallenged. “Creative doubt” is essential for progress; it drives research and innovation, unlike “destructive doubt,” which turns into obsession and suspicion regarding others’ positions and opinions. It becomes a problem when it becomes general and persistent, such as saying, “I trust no one,” an assumption that implies constant bad faith. It may cause obsessive-compulsive disorder or chronic suspicious patterns, in which case medical intervention is needed. If, however, doubt is merely a fleeting existential whisper, it is better not to dwell on it, as the issue or question may not be methodological and may not be resolvable through research and proof. Thus, there is a fundamental difference between “methodological doubt,” which is healthy, temporary, directed, and resolvable through evidence, and pathological, continuous, exaggerated, and unsettling doubt, which is harmful and potentially destructive. If a person is of the type who suffers from self-doubt and questions everything, this usually, as science has shown, reflects a higher-than-average intelligence and may indicate wisdom. The rule holds that fools are always confident in themselves, while the wise are filled with doubt about their knowledge. The philosopher Bertrand Russell said: “The more you know about something, the more you realize its subtleties. You can see the exceptions, reservations, and places where you might be wrong. Knowledge rarely means certainty; it only means that you know the questions to ask later. The ignorant suffers from none of these things; to him, the world is simple and clear because he lacks the necessary details. Thus, from the inside, ignorance may appear as certainty, and the problem lies in the fact that the modern world rewards confidence in correctness. In a heated debate, the person who harbors no doubt appears more convincing than the person who weighs all opinions. Thus, fools and bigots are given the platform and attention, while thinkers are marginalized and boycotted. In exactly the same way, a country can proudly rush toward the abyss. Therefore, some believe that if we meet someone who is confident to the point of certainty, we should not consider it a claim to pride, but rather a warning sign. And if we meet someone full of doubt, we should consider it a claim to admiration, because doubt is the voice of wisdom. Ahmed Al-Sarraff