And therefore, those who think so, are valuing style over substance. (Which is pretty superficial, if you come to think about it, which they do not).

You professor isn't excatly the smartest person around.

I worked for a CEO who threw away all of his money about 600 mill $, got degraded and now has a debt of 40 mill $.
He told himself all the time that his newspaper was strong, while he was busy weakening it, I had huge fights with him asking him to fire lots of totally incompetent people that made insane damage to the newspaper and it's relation to customers. I left 10 years ago, but 4 years after I left, the new CEO would replace all of those I appointed to be incompetent.

In my personal opinion, belief is one of the connections between Logic and Certainty. The other one is probability.

Remember the apple, onion and blindfold test? You only see the apple, they blindfold you and then they offer you the onion to bite into. However, your mind believes that it's the apple and therefore you taste apple. Surprise surprise when you find out that it's an onion.

You were certain it was an apple. How were you to know they were going to trick you? It was logic to assume that everything was going to go according to what you believed would happen. You were certain that they were going to give you the apple. In fact, they even told you they would. But they lied.
I know, lame example.

Take the theory of evolution. We tend to make rash statements as: "It is logic to believe that matter and all the laws necessary to contain so much atomic activity created itself prior to the creation of the laws. Therefore it is certain even though it's still a theory."

We want to believe it. Don't we?

We even use probability to connect this logic with its certainty. Somehow we have convinced ourselves that billions of years ago the first particle law appeared and by chance the second particle law to appear billions of years later just happened to be compatible with the first.
But then again, perhaps it was the 100th and 50 billionth particle law to spawn that got lucky. And to stretch it further still, perhaps it was the 900 billionth particle law that joined the pair to form the first trio. Of course, logic tells us that we must ignore all the other variations that spawned here and there. All trillions and trillions of them.
It is certain that variations do not exist unless we call it dark matter.
Then again, maybe they do exist but elsewhere. Now there's a thought.
Unfortunately that would truly upset the connection between Logic and Certainty because it's quite likely that out there in deep space the rules change. Therefore we could add 'location' to the list of connections.

Variations. Don't you just hate that?

Gentlemen, I introduce to you a new connection between Logic and Certainty - LOCATION.