Does Absolute Certainty Exist?

In my opinion, it really depends on what you regard as 'absolute certainty'. For example, someone could tell you that they are absolutely certain that their religion and their god or gods are absolutely real. However, such a statement is near impossible to prove, as often, the only evidence we have the writings and accounts of people who claim a certain event to happen. This is why all religions have a faith aspect to them; a worshiper of a particular religion chooses to have faith that their god/s and their religion is real. Their faith gives them absolute certainty that their beliefs are right. Now, I'm not saying that all religious people are absolutely certain that their religion is right, but that there are at least some people with absolute faith and certainty in their religion. I guess at the core of it is this question: Does absolute faith mean absolute certainty? I think an answer to this question could be, in my opinion, that absolute certainty can give way to absolute faith and vice-versa. Lets look at maths for instance. Now, all of us can and will say that 1+1 is 2. We can visualize it, we can prove it practically ourselves, you name it. However, once you get to very advanced maths, it can be hard to visualize and understand. You might not have a clue on how this formula and so on even works. But we place faith in those who know the formulas, know how to solve them, and trust them to be right. We hear that proof has been found, but most people would not bother to actually check the proof themselves, because they're either uninterested or don't have the necessary skills to check it themselves. So the faith is put on mathematicians as we trust their expertise and have near absolute faith in their ability to be right. If you regard absolute certainty as a fact backed up by evidence proving it to be real without a shadow of a doubt, than I think that sciences (the non-social sciences, Physics, Biology, and Chemistry) and Maths can fit that category. Unlike faith and philosophy, science is mostly a subject of absolutes. An apple falls to the ground because of gravity. That is something of absolute certainty. There is an immeasurable amount of proof that gravity is in fact real. Science and maths are like the blueprints of the universe: it tells us how it all works and provides the evidence for us to prove it ourselves. Technically science and maths don't really rely on faith at all. As said before, it requires evidence, and the ability to be corroborated by others. However, us, non-scientists and non-mathematicians have placed a certain degree of faith that the evidence is there despite not having the knowledge or ability to prove it themselves (they put their faith/trust in actual mathematicians and scientists and mostly believe what they have to say). I believe that what cannot be proven by science or math, we cannot have absolute certainty of. But a monk or an other type of person that is very religious may believe their religion to be absolutely certain due to their absolute faith. Going back to my original point, it really depends on your definition.
Even if there was no absolute certainty, there's no need to stress your mind doubting everything. Even if your brain is in some Matrix-style vat and this entire world is lie, is there really a point in doubting everything? If you have spent your whole life in a simulation and not even a second outside of it, than who's to say that you're living in a false world? It may be a computer simulation, but its the world you've always known, and its the world that is real to you. If you think too much about the nature of the world, it is my opinion that you may take yourself into a dark abyss that can be very hard to crawl out of. And what would the benefit be to you? You probably would not make any sort of material gains unless you wrote a book or something that millions of people bought, on your thoughts. It is often easier and sometimes happier for us to see things with a simpler perspective. However, since I believe that we can be absolutely certain about things that can be proven and observed, this is not really an issue with me, to be honest.
I believe that either something is an absolute certainty or it is not. There isn't really a middle ground to me, just two separate categories. Absolute certainties are things that can be proven with facts and evidence, and can be observed by others. There can things that are in debate on whether or not the evidence and/or theory is correct, which calls the absolute certainty of the theory into question, which I guess puts it into a bit of a middle ground, but I like to think of it as more limbo than middle ground as the answer is there somewhere, that tells us if its absolutely certain or not,we just don't know it yet.
Those are my thoughts on absolute certainty. 

First TOK Post

How do we know what is real and certain? Do we know what is real just because it has been told to us numerous times with little to know alternative opinion? These are questions that I believe TOK asks quite a lot (don't take my word for it, I've only had two TOK lessons so far). Maps, explore a part of our world that we essentially view as real. We look at maps as if they are an absolute truth even though, deep down, we may know that with maps there is no real 'correct' perspective. But to most people, Europe is north of Africa, and Australia is almost as south as you can get. But what justification is there for the mp being this way? The answer is pretty much none. The main reason we use the standard world map is mainly because people are used to the world map in its current form, the Mercator Projection. Think about it, doesn't a map that looks like this look wrong?:

If you can get so many different perspectives from an object most consider to be unimportant in their lives, imagine the different perspectives you can get from something that affects people even more. Actually, you don't even have to use your imagination, just look at politics and/or religion. Even looking at just one religion or ideology, one can see there are many differing and even contradicting sects within it. Perspectives also change with time. For example, what exactly is a necessity? If you asked a person two hundred years ago that question, their definition would almost certainly be different to yours. Things like the Internet, cars, or even democracy would almost certainly not be considered as such by that person. But today, since we (at least in countries like the U.S.), have gotten use to a society with all these aspects included, we couldn't survive without them! For most people in countries like the U.S. (low pop. density and less developed public transport system) cars are a necessity to be able to even work. The same goes for the internet (how would you apply for a job, communicate with overseas workers quickly and efficiently, etc.) This shows that perspective means a lot. 

This is also very relevant in IB subjects and subjects in general, as even with science, when one is formulating a hypothesis, for example, one usually has a certain perspective. When a scientist writes a hypothesis, the scientist suspects that this will be backed up by the evidence they find. Now, the scientist doesn't know for sure, that this is the result that they would get, but they use their reasoning, which is based on their past leanings and whatever evidence pertaining to that subject they may have found. It is a perspective/assumption until proven fact. 

However, as humans, we must make our own maps, so that we may navigate the world with greater ease. We make the north up and the south down, because it doesn't make sense to change our perspective/our way of viewing things just because we can. We strive to make our lives better, and these assumptions/perspectives, and these maps, help us make life easier and more efficient for us.