"Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get an original essayDoubt, by definition , is the feeling of uncertainty about whether something is true or not. In contrast, confidence is the feeling and belief that something is true. Both doubt and confidence, although they are the antithesis of each other. influence how areas of knowledge are perceived unique branches of knowledge that use different methods to gain further knowledge. Humanities and history are areas of knowledge that are influenced by doubt and confidence confidence is present when little is known, in contrast to how doubt increases gaining more knowledge is supported by many real-life situations and different perspectives. The examination of history in this article is linked to the Holocaust and the perspectives that different historians have on the event. With the help of the mention of the original derivation of American history, the positioning of some historians on the spectrum of revisionism due to influences of doubt and skepticism becomes clear. The humanities examination in this article is in relation to the effectiveness of vaccines and how external factors such as beliefs and false evidence can increase doubts. By analyzing these areas of knowledge, you can see a broader view of two unique and different opinions and further show the changing levels of certainty and uncertainty. With each new generation often comes a new way of looking at the past that leads to doubt about different events. This increase in doubt and subsequently skepticism helps encourage historians to do more research and find more primary sources to support their claims and theories. This follows the theory of historical revisionism which allows historians the ability to reinterpret historical events and provide further evidence to support conflicting opinions. By finding and seeking more knowledge, doubt increases as to whether previous perceptions and assumptions of details regarding the historical event are accurate or not. Many revisionists, however, use this doubt as motivation to find indisputable evidence to support their claims and beliefs about what really happened. Details involving moral or ethical arguments often produce controversy and debate when revisionists want to review them. People who oppose the review of such things and would even go so far as to deny that such events ever happened are known as history deniers. A real-life situation that exemplifies this issue regarding revisionism is the Holocaust, which is filled with doubt due to the different opinions and beliefs presented by people around the world. Although historical revisionism historiography is extremely useful as it updates history after new discoveries of evidence and information, skeptics and deniers often oppose the use of this historiography and prefer orthodox views of specific historical events. History denialism rejects the entire foundation of historical evidence, which is a form of history denialism. Many historians who support historical denial refuse to accept laws, theories and ideologies regarding historical events considered true by the majority of society. In doing so, they express their doubts about the evidence and facts and instead direct their faith towards historical denialism. belief that specific historical events never happened. Despite how both a history denier and a history skeptic often deny that historical events ever happened, the difference between the two would be that a skeptic “takes ascientific evaluation of claims” (Florien, 2010) while a denier is someone who often “automatically disproves a claim regardless of the evidence to support it.” (Florien, 2010) This is the case of the Holocaust as many historians are skeptical on all the details of the Holocaust while some even go so far as to deny that it ever happened. By rejecting all evidence, we see an ironic twist in Goethe's question because with ignorance and rejection of specific knowledge and evidence, a sense of confidence grows that the Holocaust will never happen. Goethe establishes that when little is known an individual's confidence is high, which may be true but can also mislead many individuals. Since you know only a few perspectives and opinions about a given event, it increases the extent of your confidence regarding limited knowledge that does not provide a full understanding and perspective of the event or situation. By increasing perspectives and evidence, the acquisition of knowledge helps provide a growing sense of doubt towards orthodox opinions and beliefs. This is the case made by historian David Williams. Since, for example, past American history was written primarily by white males, history was written to “serve its own class, racial, and gender interests at the expense of those who are not so fortunate.” Only a part (probably the minority) of the population was represented, the other part of individuals doubted the limited perspectives and information provided to them, which ironically contradicts Goethe's statement. Consequently, historical revisionism is probably necessary to adapt the perspective framework regarding different historical events. In doing so, historical revisionists revised the way history was written and, with the help of feminists and other movements and organizations, the confidence of that part of the population that was originally not represented increased. A paradigm shift occurs when a newly developed thought or ways of doing things changes the original ways and can lead to new information. An increase in knowledge generates more doubt and may be linked to why the paradigm changes to accommodate new knowledge. A real-life situation that exemplifies this is the use and development of vaccines. The use of vaccines is full of doubts in many different countries, despite the fact that it has been scientifically proven to be beneficial for society. The reasoning behind doubt about the effectiveness of vaccines is often influenced by religion, beliefs, and even news articles promoting false data. In the context of religion's influence on the human sciences, many people of faith believe that it is ethically wrong to “use human tissue cells to create vaccines” (The College of Physicians of Philadelphia, 2017) and that “the body is sacred… and should be healed by God or by natural means.”(ibid) Many people have grown up in religious families and have adapted to these family religious ways. For this reason, their trust in the knowledge that has been part of their lives is extremely strong and by placing their trust in religion, many people of faith doubt outside information regarding vaccinations and often do not take into account the new perspective of science. In the context of the spread of false data, media production has steadily increased due to the development and innovation of new technologies. For this reason, society is easily exposed to new information which, according to Goethe, increases doubts. Often, society is told to trust its “intuition, but no clear guidelines are given to distinguish it from superstition, paranoia or"