: Is it good to add 'I believe' at the beginning of the sentence? I believe that people should eat apples. or, People should eat apples. Which one is best, or when to use which?

Vote Up Vote Down

You absolutely should add "I Believe" if, without that phrase, you would be making a claim of fact that you cannot be certain is true.

Do you have scientific proof that people should eat apples for their health? Without some medical studies, you make a misleading statement to say "people should eat apples for their health", you are implicitly lying to people by implying that this is a known fact.

However, saying "I believe people should eat apples for their health" is a truthful statement if you truly believe that.

So is "I believe eating apples is a gateway to heroin use, promiscuity, harsh music and the sexualization of astronomy".

I can argue that eating apples almost never sexualizes astronomy, but I can't argue that you don't believe what you say you believe.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Depending on the context, writing "I believe" can make your claim weaker. "I believe" can mean you follow a religion/faith/, or it can mean I think; in argumentative claims you sound less confident in your claim. It can also lead people to question your credentials to make such a claim.

"We believe everyone should have food."-a non-profit food bank

"I believe god will save us"-person of faith

"I believe cats are better than dogs." -argumentative essay claim

Now take out the I believe and see what happens in your mind.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

If your working on a piece for publishing that will attack a figure or orgainzation, "I believe" could be useful to denote that the accusation is not based in anything provable.

For example "Spider-Man is a threat and a menace" is a statement of fact. However, J. Johan Jamerson is opening himself to a massive libel suit (but not a Slander suit, as he's quick to correct Peter) because he's coloring his stories of events with his own intepretation of them. "I believe Spider-Man is a threat and a menace" is perfectly lawsuit free because J. Johna Jamerson is perfectly entitled to both hold his opinion and speak his professed opinion, no matter how untrue it is proven to be. I would say this example is close to @Mark Baker's first example, but dissimilar because as we all know, Jamerson accepts no opposition to his belief as reasonable. Quirks of the U.S. defimations laws to be sure, which are fairly loose and favor the publisher a great deal.

(0)