An important issue for our conversation.And what is certainty? Is it logical: deductive certainty or psychological:feeling certain; or is there some other kind of certainty? — Janus
My know-how and my belief that I know how are two different things.If you know how to do something is it a coherent question to ask yourself whether you are certain that you know how to do it? — Janus
In some cases it may be appropriate, albeit cumbersome. A more direct approach would be to inquire: Do I (really) know how to do it? For my answer to this question informs us about the relevant belief.Or is it an appropriate question to ask yourself whether you believe that you know how to do it? — Janus
I'm wary of this kind of recursive use of verbs like "to know".Or that you know that you know how to do it? — Janus
How do you mean?Are these all not just conceptual elaborations upon that which is obvious, rendering that which was obvious to be no longer obvious, or even uncontroversially believable? — Janus
I'm not sure I'd characterize the relation among these terms quite that way.Yes - I agree. Certainty, however, entails belief. Knowledge - well, in the end, that's one of the results of belief; and if one accepts JBT, knowledge entails belief. — Banno
I'm never sure what "internal" and "external" are supposed to mean in such contexts, and I prefer to avoid the whole distinction. Or let Moore clarify the matter till we have a clear idea what's at stake in his demonstrations.What might be interesting to discuss is whether certainty entails knowledge. If Moore's "here is a hand" does not present a justification for believing in an external reality, but instead shows a certainty in an external reality, then belief in an external reality is certain and yet not known. — Banno
It's never a sufficient causal explanation, whether the event is past or future. It's a sufficient explanation for us, who consider the matter casually at a rough level of description, and take the rest of the circumstances for granted without a refined understanding of them.Indeed! Further evidence, perhaps, that using belief to explain an act has a post-hoc character. John ate a sandwich. That he was hungry and believed eating the sandwich would cure his hunger is sufficient to explain why he ate the sandwich, but not to predict that he will act in the same way next time. — Banno
I can't picture it working that way. Unless maybe "actions" includes, or is restricted to, things like "thinking these thoughts" and "asserting these propositions".Make it a conjunction of disjunctions. Someone who believes in god is disposed to (go to church on Sunday and say their prayers at night) or (go to a mosque on Friday and give money to charity) or...
The question then is can any belief be reduced to such a conjunction of actions? — Banno
we may distinguish formal (deductive, logico-mathematical) certainty from psychological certainty. — Cabbage Farmer
To me, belief is synonymous with understanding. The claim, "I believe in such and such," is just that, a claim or a statement. Usually without proper reference to the truth behind it. — BrianW
I'm inclined to suggest that ordinarily, one who takes a strong feeling of certainty for a state of perfect indubitability and infallibility is epistemologically naive and less reasonable than one who leaves room for doubt even in the presence of such feelings. — Cabbage Farmer
And I find myself inclined to deny that certainty (of every sort) entails belief. — Cabbage Farmer
We might say Moore's certainty about something called "the external world" is merely psychological, not based on any justification. On the other hand, if his theory leaves no room for an alternative, isn't he in a sense "justified" and "formally certain" in the context of his own thoughts? But we reject his conceptual framework, and thus undermine his justification. If he wants to persuade us, he'll have to do better. — Cabbage Farmer
Why say that he searched the kitchen because he believed the keys were there, rather than he searched the kitchen because the keys were there? — Banno
That the keys were in fact there is irrelevant to why he was looking for them in that place — Sapientia
Pat doesn't know where the keys are. He searches for them in the kitchen because that is one of the places they could be. — Janus
Why say that he searched the kitchen because he believed the keys were there, rather than he searched the kitchen because the keys were there? — Banno
I don't think it is "he knows" that is implied by "the keys could be in the kitchen" but "he thinks". — Janus
The notion I am playing with is that we get the order of the explanation wrong.
It's not:
Pat believes the keys are in the Kitchen
So, all things being equal, Pat will search in the kitchen
but
Pat searched in the kitchen
Therefore Pat says he believes the keys are in the kitchen — Banno
The idea is that a belief is not an individual, not a thing, so much as a series of actions, spoken about in a certain way. — Banno
Here is a fact: the cat is on the mat.
Here is a statement of that fact: "The cat is on the mat".
There is a fact that is named in the statement of that fact. Hence the quote marks.
@creativesoul believes that the cat is on the mat.
Or is it:
@creativesoul believes that "the cat is on the mat"?
Is the belief a thing that has the name "the cat is on the mat"? — Banno
Internalise or externalism? Introspection or action?
Internalism holds that the content of the belief is irrelevant; that the cat's being on the mat makes no difference to one's belief that the cat is on the mat. After all, one can hold false beliefs. On the other hand one ought believe only what is true; belief in cats on mats must after all somehow take account of cats on mats.
One's actions might be at odds with one's introspections.
So which is the real belief, the one reached by introspection or the one deduced from action?
Neither: there is no real belief... — Banno
I'm not seeing any puzzle in this. — Janus
We play accounts in which we set up a belief as a cause for our actions, only to find that the belief consists in those actions. — Banno
My belief that I can open my front door with my front door key does not consist in the actions of me opening my front door with my front door key. — Sapientia
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.