Street Epistemology - Practice

[curiosne]

No, my goal is trying to understand how you determine what is true of life and also what is true of reality. Let me know if this is getting too long winded and I'll try to close off my questions quickly...I'm new to this so my line of questioning might not be very succinct (apologies in advance).

Can you elaborate on the "anything" part of evidence? Are feelings counted as evidence? Or if I made a sound logical argument, would that also be evidence?

Because of the format, you may want to ask more than one question at a time, if it doesn't mess up the flow of your presentation. 

You ask good questions;  feelings, I waver on.  I think that they can be evidence, but as support only and in addition to other evidence.   A logical argument, or reason, I could see where it could technically be counted as evidence,  but I would normally separate them, with evidence being a part of ones reasons.

If I may interject . . .

. . . I would love anyone to give an example of what non-physical evidence of anything could even conceivably be in principle without being a self-contradictory concept. Doesn't the concept of evidence, by its very nature, presuppose something that can at least in principle be evident to us, and aren't we physical beings, and can't evidence only be evident to physical beings . . . physically?

I think it's all in the wording of it. Going back to one of my examples where I claim that I have $10 in my pocket, you would accept my claim (even without physical proof) that I actually have $10 in my pocket. Reason being that it's a mundane claim and hence you would not go to that extra step of searching me for the $10...ie me telling you that I only have $10 in money is sufficient for you to believe me.

I'm trying not to get tied up in semantics currently as my claim above is not really evidence, it's just a claim but one that you'd ordinarily accept.