kat and i just finished talking; mostly arguing about my blog "proof" below. she can't seem to agree with this: "it was about some things that you can't PROVE and all you have to do is trust.." she asked me of occasions when that can be applied. one of my examples was my love for her. i told her she can never really prove it because for all she knows, i could just be fooling her. but she believes it nonetheless. she said one cannot trust anyone if there is no reason to believe him/her, which is a very good point. but i'm too stubborn to give in. so was she.

so the question is, is the quoted line above valid? is it applicable in reality? and can those so-called "reasons to believe" be considered proof for someone to be able to trust?

after 2 hours of debating, both of us got confused funny. that's why i'm asking anyone to enlighten us however nonesense this may seem. PLEASE leave a comment. thank you. P.S. if you still haven't seen 'proof,' and i tell you to watch it because it's a good movie, would you trust me? and if you would, is it because you have a reason to believe in me or would you trust me just because? haha puta! i still have to study pharma.