aspose file tools*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes Suspect and doubt Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "Suspect and doubt" Watch "Suspect and doubt" New topic
Author

Suspect and doubt

Akhilesh Trivedi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 22, 2005
Posts: 1526
Difference between the two? Please someone.


Keep Smiling Always — My life is smoother when running silent. -paul
[FAQs] [Certification Guides] [The Linux Documentation Project]
Joanne Neal
Rancher

Joined: Aug 05, 2005
Posts: 3539
    
  15
One's got 7 letters and one has five. I'll leave it to you to work out which is which.


Joanne
Mike Okri
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Posts: 83
To doubt that something is true is to suspect that it is false. To suspect that something is false is to doubt that it is true.
Akhilesh Trivedi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 22, 2005
Posts: 1526
I suspect that 'which' has got five letters. But i don't know if I should suspect it or doubt it.
Joanne Neal
Rancher

Joined: Aug 05, 2005
Posts: 3539
    
  15
Akhilesh Trivedi wrote:I suspect that 'which' has got five letters. But i don't know if I should suspect it or doubt it.

Unless you are very bad at counting, you should neither suspect it or doubt it.
Campbell Ritchie
Sheriff

Joined: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 38818
    
  23
You cannot doubt it. It is absolutely true. Look w = 1 h = 2 i = 3 c = 4 h = 5. See. 5. No doubt about it at all.

Doubt means to think something is false; suspect means to think something is true, both without definite evidence.
Daniel Doboseru
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 26, 2011
Posts: 57
Suspect is more aggressive (I suspect he did it).
Doubt is more passive (I doubt he did it).
Joanne Neal
Rancher

Joined: Aug 05, 2005
Posts: 3539
    
  15
Doubt is more aggressive (I doubt he is innocent).
Suspect is more passive (I suspect he is innocent).

I suspect that generalisations will lead to more doubt.
Michael Matola
whippersnapper
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 25, 2001
Posts: 1746
    
    2
Joanne Neal wrote:I suspect that generalisations will lead to more doubt.


You post that from your comfortable redoubt.
Ernest Friedman-Hill
author and iconoclast
Marshal

Joined: Jul 08, 2003
Posts: 24184
    
  34

Both can be used as a noun:

  • I have a doubt
  • You are a suspect


  • But only one of these means something totally different depending on the dialect being spoken.


    [Jess in Action][AskingGoodQuestions]
    Jesper de Jong
    Java Cowboy
    Saloon Keeper

    Joined: Aug 16, 2005
    Posts: 14149
        
      18

    I've noticed that many Indian people use the word "doubt" on the forums here when they mean "question".

    "I have a doubt about ..." instead of "I have a question about ...".


    Java Beginners FAQ - JavaRanch SCJP FAQ - The Java Tutorial - Java SE 7 API documentation
    Scala Notes - My blog about Scala
    Ernest Friedman-Hill
    author and iconoclast
    Marshal

    Joined: Jul 08, 2003
    Posts: 24184
        
      34

    Jesper de Jong wrote:I've noticed that many Indian people use the word "doubt" on the forums here when they mean "question".

    "I have a doubt about ..." instead of "I have a question about ...".


    Indeed, this is what I'm saying.
    Maneesh Godbole
    Saloon Keeper

    Joined: Jul 26, 2007
    Posts: 10372
        
        8

    Jesper de Jong wrote:I've noticed that many Indian people use the word "doubt" on the forums here when they mean "question".
    "I have a doubt about ..." instead of "I have a question about ...".

    Indians never ever have doubts...only queries


    [How to ask questions] [Donate a pint, save a life!] [Onff-turn it on!]
    fred rosenberger
    lowercase baba
    Bartender

    Joined: Oct 02, 2003
    Posts: 11313
        
      16

    Campbell Ritchie wrote:Doubt means to think something is false; suspect means to think something is true, both without definite evidence.

    I suspect that is false...

    I think you can say "i doubt that is true" just as easily as you'd say "I doubt that is false".

    In my mind, 'doubt' is stronger - it implies some actual evidence for feeling the way you do. Suspect is more of a feeling or intuition, without any real evidence.


    There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    I would say you use 'doubt' when you think the opposite and 'suspect' when you think the same, but don't actually have any evidence either way.

    'I doubt that is true' means you think it is false.
    'I suspect that is true' means you think it is true
    Mike Simmons
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 05, 2008
    Posts: 3014
        
      10
    Maneesh Godbole wrote:
    Jesper de Jong wrote:I've noticed that many Indian people use the word "doubt" on the forums here when they mean "question".
    "I have a doubt about ..." instead of "I have a question about ...".

    Indians never ever have doubts...only queries
    Well, they very very frequently say they have doubts. But I doubt they really do. ;)
    Michael Matola
    whippersnapper
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 25, 2001
    Posts: 1746
        
        2
    fred rosenberger wrote:
    Campbell Ritchie wrote:Doubt means to think something is false; suspect means to think something is true, both without definite evidence.

    I suspect that is false...

    I think you can say "i doubt that is true" just as easily as you'd say "I doubt that is false".


    Of course you can. Only in the first case you think truth is false, and in the second case you think false is false.
    Michael Matola
    whippersnapper
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 25, 2001
    Posts: 1746
        
        2
    Mike Simmons wrote:Well, they very very frequently say they have doubts. But I doubt they really do. ;)


    Could you prove that beyond all shadow of a doubting thomas?

    (Apologies to Anthony Burgess)
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    fred rosenberger wrote:In my mind, 'doubt' is stronger - it implies some actual evidence for feeling the way you do. Suspect is more of a feeling or intuition, without any real evidence.


    To doubt is to have suspicion without evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without evidence. If there's evidence, suspicion and doubt become fact.
    Mike Simmons
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 05, 2008
    Posts: 3014
        
      10
    Mike Okri wrote:
    fred rosenberger wrote:In my mind, 'doubt' is stronger - it implies some actual evidence for feeling the way you do. Suspect is more of a feeling or intuition, without any real evidence.


    To doubt is to have suspicion without evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without evidence. If there's evidence, suspicion and doubt become fact.

    I don't think so. To me, those statements would make much more sense if you replace "evidence" with "proof":
    Fixed wrote:To doubt is to have suspicion without proof. To suspect is to have doubt without proof. If there's proof, suspicion and doubt become fact.

    But of course, evidence is not the same thing as proof.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    Mike Simmons wrote:But of course, evidence is not the same thing as proof.

    Evidence is the same thing as proof. If I can provide evidence that your fingerprint is on a knife, I have proved that you touched the knife. According to wikipedia A proof is sufficient evidence or argument for the truth of a proposition. Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof.
    Mike Simmons
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 05, 2008
    Posts: 3014
        
      10
    Um, no. Your wikipedia quote indicates that proof is evidence, or that everything that goes into a proof is evidence, in its broadest sense. However it does not in any way imply the converse, that all evidence is proof. Not at all. Evidence may be considered proof of something, if it's good, strong evidence. But evidence may also be weak in one way or another. It may be inconclusive, circumstantial, misunderstood, or even an outright lie. The fact that some evidence is poor evidence does not change the fact that it's evidence. But it can prevent that evidence from being considered proof of anything.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    I'll repeat the wikipedia quote. Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof. If it does not fulfill the burden of proof, it is not evidence.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof.


    And dollars are the currency with which I fullfil my need for a Ferrari, but if I don't have sufficient dollars I don't get my Ferrari

    Mike Okri wrote:A proof is sufficient evidence


    And if you don't have sufficient evidence, you don't have proof.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    Joanne Neal wrote:if you don't have sufficient evidence, you don't have proof.

    Point taken. Let me rephrase. To doubt is to have suspicion without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without sufficient evidence. If there's sufficient evidence, suspicion and doubt become fact.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt is to have suspicion without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without sufficient evidence.

    With all due respect, that is totally meaningless.
    To have suspicion is just another way to say to suspect.
    To have doubt is just another way to say to doubt.
    So, basically, what you are saying is
    To doubt is to suspect without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to doubt without sufficient evidence.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    I don't get your point. We are both saying the same thing...To doubt is to have suspicion without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without sufficient evidence.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    The original question was what is the difference between to doubt and to suspect, to which your answer seems to be to doubt is to suspect and to suspect is to doubt.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    Yes. Like I said originally,

    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt that something is true is to suspect that it is false. To suspect that something is false is to doubt that it is true.


    Another way of saying this is

    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt is to have suspicion without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without sufficient evidence.

    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Ignore this post
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:Yes. Like I said originally,

    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt that something is true is to suspect that it is false. To suspect that something is false is to doubt that it is true.

    That's just repeating the same thing the other way round. There's no difference between those two sentences, although I do agree with what they mean.

    Mike Okri wrote:Another way of saying this is

    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt is to have suspicion without sufficient evidence. To suspect is to have doubt without sufficient evidence.


    That is not another way of saying it. The without sufficient evidence part is implicit in the meaning of the words so can be ignored. That leaves you with
    To doubt is to have suspicion. To suspect is to have doubt.
    which implies you think there is no difference between the meanings of the two words, yet in your first quote you say there is a difference.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    The statement To doubt is to have suspicion and to suspect is to have doubt does not differentiate between suspicion and doubt. It only emphasizes the fact that you cannot have doubt without having suspicion and vice versa.

    The statement To doubt that something is true is to suspect that it is false. To suspect that something is false is to doubt that it is true differentiates between suspicion and doubt. From this statement, you can deduce the previous statement.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:you cannot have doubt without having suspicion and vice versa.

    This is only true if you change your belief to it's exact opposite.

    I doubt I'm going to convince you.
    I suspect I'm not going to convince you.


    Whilst the two phrases as a whole mean the same thing, what I suspect and what I doubt are total opposites.

    Mike Okri wrote:To doubt that something is true is to suspect that it is false.


    My point exactly. You doubt one thing, you suspect its complete opposite.

    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    The statement you cannot have doubt without having suspicion and vice versa is always true. This is a very general statement. If you doubt something, this implies that you suspect something. You may qualify the statement further by saying that if you doubt that something is true, this implies that you suspect that it is false. Nevertheless, doubt and suspicion always occur together.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:The statement you cannot have doubt without having suspicion and vice versa is always true. This is a very general statement. If you doubt something, this implies that you suspect something.

    If the two somethings are the same thing then that is completely wrong. You can't doubt and suspect the same thing at the same time.
    If the two somethings are different things, then that statement is just meaningless.
    If you still disagree then maybe giving me a concrete example would help me understand what you are trying to say.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    I didn't say that you can doubt and suspect the same thing at the same time. If you doubt something, you suspect the opposite, for example if you doubt that it will rain today, this implies that you suspect that it will not rain today. The statement I made is you cannot have doubt without having suspicion and vice versa. In the above example, doubt and suspicion occur together. You cannot give me an example of doubt without suspicion or suspicion without doubt.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:I didn't say that you can doubt and suspect the same thing at the same time.

    Well actually you did at one point (unless something is also be the opposite of something).
    Mike Okri wrote:If you doubt something, this implies that you suspect something


    You then added
    Mike Okri wrote:You may qualify the statement further by saying that if you doubt that something is true, this implies that you suspect that it is false.

    That's not qualifying the original statement - that's changing it so it makes sense. Use of vague or imprecise language when discussing semantics is never a good idea. Although as this is in the meaningless drivel forum, I guess it is appropriate.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    Mike Okri wrote:If you doubt something, this implies that you suspect something

    I think you misunderstood me. This statement in no way implies that you doubt and suspect the same thing. I have made no reference to same thing. The emphasis is on the fact that doubt and suspicion go together i.e. you cannot give me an example of doubt without suspicion or suspicion without doubt.

    Mike Okri wrote:If you doubt that something is true, this implies that you suspect that it is false.

    We've already established that this statement is correct. To qualify a statement means to clarify a statement by making it more specific. Here, I have clarified the original statement by differentiating between doubt and suspicion in specific context.
    Joanne Neal
    Rancher

    Joined: Aug 05, 2005
    Posts: 3539
        
      15
    Mike Okri wrote:I think you misunderstood me.

    No I didn't. I knew what you meant. i was just making the point that the language you used was capable of being interpreted differently to what you actually meant.

    Mike Okri wrote:This statement in no way implies that you doubt and suspect the same thing.

    I disagree. By using the same word (something) to refer to different things, you open yourself up to the interpretation that you mean the same thing.
    Mike Okri
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Jun 22, 2011
    Posts: 83
    Joanne Neal wrote:No I didn't

    You cannot say that you didn't misunderstand me when you obviously did by thinking that by something, I meant same thing. If I say Mr A ate something and Miss B ate something, it doen't necessarily mean that they've eaten the same thing. Like I said earlier, in the statement If you doubt something, this implies that you suspect something, the emphasis is on the act of doubting and act of suspecting and the fact that doubting and suspecting always go together.
     
    I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
     
    subject: Suspect and doubt