We are led astray by the picture of a belief as a thing in a mind. A belief is rather post hoc, inferred as a folk explanation of the behavioural results of brain activity. So I can agree with your causal chain leading from perceptions to brain to behaviour; but not to belief. The belief is a different language game - dare I use that term - running in parallel with and about the same thing, the act; but instead of being in physical terms, it is in intentional terms. — Banno
I would say that you have this exactly backwards. Behaviours reflect belief. — creativesoul
While I like the idea of looking for agreement, I can't agree with this. Since the meaning of a word is its use, knowing-that reduces to knowing-how. Language is, after all, a human action. — Banno
But a good post, Meta - you have perhaps hit on a basic disagreement. — Banno
We have some agreement on justification, but there's a way of using "know" which indicates that it is believed that the thing known is necessarily true. Those who claim knowledge as justified true belief would assert this. That is what I referred to earlier as "a certainty", in the sense of "it is certain that...". We use "know" in the sense of knowing-that to indicate that the thing known is true. I do not think that knowing-how can account for this type of certainty, as "knowing-how" is only supported by that confidence which I referred to, the attitude of certitude. — Metaphysician Undercover
That wouldn't be Jack's belief. Cannot be. Jack has no statements. That would be your report(or someone's report) of Jack's belief. It would be wrong in the only way that matters... the content. — creativesoul
Of course it is Jack's belief. If not Jack's then whose? That he can't say it doesn't imply that it is not his. He can't say "that's my tooth" either. It's his tooth, nonetheless. — Banno
It's the content that needs to make sense here Banno. Jack's belief does not consist of statements. He has none. His belief cannot consist of statements. Nor can it be the case that Jack's belief is some attitude or other towards a statement. — creativesoul
I'm not saying the word or concept belief doesn't get it's meaning from public behavior, of course it does.
When I sit on a chair, am I not showing that I believe a chair is there to sit on? No one has to state the belief to know that the person showing the belief, has the belief. You can state it, or I can state it, but that doesn't mean there is no belief prior to the statement. It's often seen in our public actions even before it's stated.
Are you saying that a concept cannot refer to something prior to it's linguistic creation? When I read what others are saying it seems they're implying this, as though beliefs can't exist apart from the concept belief, or the linguistic use of the term belief. — Sam26
Notice that knowing how to ride a bike presupposes a bike? Sans the vehicle, the notion of riding a bike is nonsense. — Banno
Now you seem to think there is a problem here for JTB. Please understand that from my reading, OC shows that it is illegitimate to say that we know hinge propositions. That's because they do not admit to justification, and hence are not subject to the JTB definition, and hence not examples of knowledge. No potential to be wrong, no knowledge. — Banno
A belief is a firm opinion, a conviction. To expect is to regard as likely a future occurrence. A correlation is a mutual relation or dependency of two things.
If I understand you correctly... — Metaphysician Undercover
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.