Truth and Knowledge

I was thinking about what we talked about last on Tuesday about the difference between the statements "I think that," "I believe that," and "I know that." We stated that "I know that" was a stronger statement than "I think that" and "I believe that." It was also mentioned that perhaps "I think that" and " I believe that" were synonymous. Although I think that we often use those two phrases synonymously, there is a difference or else there would be no reason to put both of those up. 

When somebody states that they "know" something, we assume that they have evidence and facts regarding the situation. 

...Tying into the example between "This is a book" and "Obama is having an affair." 

I think that it is not so much about "Obama" having the affair as much as it is an accusation of someone having an affair. If "Wild Bill" was having an affair, wouldn't it require the same evidence as Obama to prove that it was true. "This is a book" is an assumed truth. We assume that since we've seen books before and the book in front of you matches the identifications that we have from past experience with books, it is a book. Even if someone is often caught having affairs, we still want SOME evidence for the accusation. 

The problem between truth and knowledge is that we often use truth to gain knowledge while we are also using knowledge to gain truth.