A Quote by Simon Sinek

What you do is proof of what you believe. — © Simon Sinek
What you do is proof of what you believe.

Quote Topics

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
I don't believe anything till I have seen the proof. For anything without proof, I think we should believe the theory that gives us peace. It doesn't matter whether the theory is true or not.
As it is natural to believe many things without proof, so, despite all proof, is it natural to disbelieve others.
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.
I don't believe Fermat had a proof. I think he fooled himself into thinking he had a proof.
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who disbelieve, no amount of proof is sufficient.
I don’t believe in god. There’s no proof he exists. In a world where there isn’t even proof of the future, the past exists. Even if it’s tainted with misunderstandings and delusions, if the people themselves believe in it, the past is the truth to them. And, if you base your actions or your life around it, in a way, it’s a type of god itself.
A proof only becomes a proof after the social act of "accepting it as a proof".
What God declares the believing heart confesses without the need of further proof. Indeed, to seek proof is to admit doubt, and to obtain proof is to render faith superfluous.
Proof is boring. Proof is tiresome. Proof is an irrelevance. People would far rather be handed an easy lie than search for a difficult truth, especially if it suits their own purposes.
A prevalent fallacy is the assumption that a proof of an afterlife would also be a proof of the existence of a deity. This is far from being the case. If, as I hold, there is no good reason to believe that a god either created or presides over this world, there is equally no good reason to believe that a god created or presides over the next world, on the unlikely supposition that such a thing exists.
Be sceptical, ask questions, demand proof. Demand evidence. Don't take anything for granted. But here's the thing: When you get proof, you need to accept the proof. And we're not that good at doing that.
People think of faith as being something that you don't really believe, a device in helping you believe simply it. Of course that is quite wrong. As Pascal says, faith is a gift of God. It is different from the proof of it. It is the kind of faith God himself places in the heart, of which the proof is often the instrument... He says of it, too, that it is the heart which is aware of God, and not reason. That is what faith is: God perceived by the heart, not be reason.
To this day, I do not believe that five million were killed. I consider it technically impossible that could have happened. I do not believe it. I have not received proof of that up until now.
I mean the word proof not in the sense of the lawyers, who set two half proofs equal to a whole one, but in the sense of a mathematician, where half proof = 0, and it is demanded for proof that every doubt becomes impossible.
I am obliged to interpolate some remarks on a very difficult subject: proof and its importance in mathematics. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians, are contemptuous about proof. I have heard Professor Eddington, for example, maintain that proof, as pure mathematicians understand it, is really quite uninteresting and unimportant, and that no one who is really certain that he has found something good should waste his time looking for proof.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!