Wildfires in Brazil have been intensifying recently, bringing images of vast areas covered in smoke. It’s almost inevitable to associate this with the popular phrase “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” often used to suggest that when there are signs of something, there’s usually some truth behind it. But does this expression really capture the complexity of what we see?
While it’s often true that smoke results from a fire, the phrase seems overly simplistic. Consider a concrete example: not all “smoke” comes from an active fire. It could be water vapor, which can easily be mistaken for smoke in certain circumstances. Or, a combustion engine generates smoke as a natural byproduct. The point is that smoke does not always equate to fire.
In my daily life, working with logic and mathematics, events are calculated in terms of probabilities and possibilities. From this perspective, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” presents a deterministic view of life, ignoring uncertainties and multiple factors that may be present. Yes, the presence of smoke often indicates fire, but there is also an important, though sometimes underestimated, margin of cases where the cause is something else. It’s important to always remember these exceptions.
Life is full of nuances. Blindly believing that all smoke leads to fire ignores those subtleties. In complex situations, it is crucial to dig deeper, because simplicity often fails to reflect reality. A more fitting phrase might be “where there’s smoke, there may be fire.” This reminds us that, while it’s a possibility, it is not always the only truth.