Final answer:
The question explores the complex dynamic between cognitive and emotional aspects of doubt within the realm of philosophy. It addresses how emotional doubt can exist without cognitive justification, and vice versa, within the context of skepticism and belief systems. The discussion considers various philosophical responses and the influence of emotions on skepticism and belief.
Step-by-step explanation:
The inquiry about whether it is possible to internally find no reason to doubt something yet still feel doubt, and conversely, to find reasons to doubt yet not feel any doubt, touches on the intricate relationship between cognition and emotion. Our cognitive appraisal of evidence may not always align with our emotional responses, leading to scenarios where we can experience doubt as an emotion without cognitive reasons, or lack doubt despite cognitive skepticism. Philosophy, skepticism, and belief systems are interwoven in this discourse, examining how we justify beliefs and handle doubt.
For instance, skeptical arguments may enforce the notion that without certainty, we cannot truly know, prompting responses that challenge the necessity of certainty for justification. Conversely, we can have emotional investments that influence our degree of skepticism or belief, potentially obscuring objective judgment. Belief systems are subject to expansion and contraction, as reflection may reveal inconsistencies, prompting revisions to maintain coherence and satisfactorily align with reason and external evidence.