"Anything is possible." It is a common phrase that is used when one wishes to acknowledge the existence of other possibilities. The problem is that "anything" is not possible. To truly accept this is to destabilize the foundation of all human knowledge. While it is indeed true that many facts rely on assumptions as a foundation to build upon, discrediting all foundations is equivalent to eradicating the value of information, knowledge, and learning. It declares all truth unobtainable by mankind. And, of course, such a philosophy can only be regarded as a belief, because it would be contradictory to have a truth that discredits all truth. Truth must be compatible with itself.
The idea that anything is possible leads us to the idea that none of us can know about anything – the idea that all thoughts, affirmations, or assertions cannot exist in the realm of certainty. While this puts truth on the ultimate pedestal, it also makes it unreachable. And when something cannot be found, you might find people who lose interest in the idea of discovering it. Now the general idea does not go about vilifying any particular belief, or beliefs in general, nor does it reproach man's desire to not believe something. In fact, the philosophy itself does not cause too many issues itself because there exist a great number of cases where mankind cannot know the answer. However, it does man a great disservice whenever an individual or a group uses it 1) for the excuse to abandon discovery, or 2) to accept improbable causes or effects on the same scale as probable ones.
Yet this post is not about this philosophy, per se. It is more about accepting the broad idea within the confines of a single case of circumstantial ignorance. Just because you yourself do not know whether a fact is actually true or probable, that does not mean you should accept the potentiality of absolutely anything. It is a case of temporarily adopting a philosophy in order to explain away one's lack of information or logic. This means, that through the usage of a simple phrase, one ignorantly believes an idea when the foundation previously required to establish such an idea is not present. Not even the values of the philosophy and the individual are compared. It is simply a lapse in judgment we all have at some point when trying to communicate.
The simple solution? Instead of saying anything is possible, say that you could be wrong, or that something specific is unknowable.
