Abstract

In belief-related matters, because the necessity, i. e. all the pillars of the Principle of Presumption are present and there are no obstacles, there is no uncertainty regarding the principle feasibility of applying presumption concerning them; rather the absoluteness of its arguments also include actions of the heart. Regardless, some have negated the feasibility of applying presumption in belief-related issues by relying on proofs such as objectivity, or the reliability of belief on certitude, the inapplicability of the arguments for presumption on actions of the heart and also the legal necessity of attaining conscientious certainty regarding beliefs. In contrast, there are others who – while dividing belief-related issues into two types of those that require conscientious certitude and those that simply need commitment of the heart – believe that in the beliefs of the second type both thematic and edictive presumption applies but in case of the first type of beliefs only edictive presumption applies. The present research shows that because belief is a conscientious issue, doubt is belief itself is relieved by referring to the conscience and the application of presumption in belief itself is completely meaningless. There is also no possibility for the occurrence of doubt in the remaining and application of presumption in the belief-related rules in the subjective aspect because none of these types of rules have a temporal goal. But the application of the Principle of Presumption is both rationally as well as imminently possible in regards to beliefs, i. e. belief-related topics and issues‌‌.