On evidence - Regina Rini in TLS:

‘The eclipse, from my vantage, is still a projection, not an actuality. Yet it is nonetheless a settled matter, a thing that will have happened, because there is hardly anything better known to science than the movements of the heavens. I can dispense with the qualifiers and weasel words used to anticipate lesser contingencies such as economics or politics. Not even a Russian election is quite so certain. The eclipse will have happened on Monday. If somehow it has not – if the Sun and Moon do not turn up where we expect them – then we’ll have much bigger problems than an inaccurate column.
Yet for all that certainty, an eclipse is a matter of perception rather than of fundamental fact. Consider: where did the eclipse “happen”? I live in Canada, but if you are reading this in, say, London, there is a sense in which the April 8 event (much hyped in the North American press) did not happen for you at all.’

(…)

‘It is wrong always”, he [William Kingdon Clifford] wrote, “everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” He offers the example of a ship owner who takes payment from passengers on a steamer he has failed to properly inspect. True, this owner does not know the ship has structural problems when it leaves shore, but that is because he has chosen specifically not to find out facts that would inconvenience him. When the ship later sinks, do we let the owner escape blame because he can honestly report that he did not know it would happen? Or do we fault him for precisely that failure to gather evidence?’ (…)
‘But until then I cannot predict even my own movements with the same confidence as the skies above.’

Read the article here.

Most moral lessons teach that we are supposed to know, that we should not become bystanders but upstanders.

The problem is that we do not know exactly how to define injustice, there are obvious examples but even then, the response is less obvious. Should we offer the homeless person on the street our bed or will some money and an apple suffice?

Also, what can we predict? The movements of the heavens are predictable, but our perception of it is less predictable, Freedom is, as a Dutch philosopher (Victor Kal), said also: suspense.

The casino is freedom, not our own freedom but that’s a different story.
Freud would say that it is sheer impossible to know what we don’t want to know i.e. suppression.

Psychanalysis might help, after a few decades.