believe (v.)
Old English belyfan "to have faith or confidence" (in a person), earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (West Saxon), from Proto-Germanic *ga-laubjan "to believe," perhaps literally "hold dear (or valuable, or satisfactory), to love" (source also of Old Saxon gilobian "believe," Dutch geloven, Old High German gilouben, German glauben), ultimately a compound based on PIE root *leubh- "to care, desire, love" (see belief).
Meaning "be persuaded of the truth of" (a doctrine, system, religion, etc.) is from mid-13c.; meaning "credit upon the grounds of authority or testimony without complete demonstration, accept as true" is from early 14c. General sense "be of the opinion, think" is from c. 1300. Related: Believed (formerly occasionally beleft); believing.
Meaning "conviction of the truth of a proposition or alleged fact without knowledge" is by 1530s; it is also "sometimes used to include the absolute conviction or certainty which accompanies knowledge" [Century Dictionary].
I could not find a dictionary that equated "belief"with "certainty", only with trust, confidence and so on. Nothin to support the idea of belief implying certitude. — Banno
Have I claimed otherwise? — praxis
I could not find a dictionary that equated "belief"with "certainty", only with trust, confidence and so on. Nothin to support the idea of belief implying certitude. — Banno
What one believes is not necessarily true, of course, but one believes that it is necessarily true, which means that one cannot acknowledge that it might be false without ceasing to believe it. — Janus
I could not believe (feel sure) that they were in all three of the places that I imagine. — praxis
"credit upon the grounds of authority or testimony without complete demonstration, accept as true" is belief without certainty, which I do not see as problematic. — Banno
Yeah, this turn of events from Janus has surprised me too. I've never heard of "I believe" being equated with"I'm certain""I feel certain", it seemed out of the blue. — Isaac
I could not believe (feel sure) that they were in all three of the places that I imagine.
— praxis
You absolutely could. It's perfectly possible to believe (even to feel sure of) two contradictory things at once, people do it all the time. — Isaac
What one can't do is act on both beliefs, but one can hold both beliefs. Were it not possible, each alternative would have to be completely modelled from scratch in the brain as an when it was needed.
Like...?The kinds of things I have listed as knowledge cannot be seriously doubted, let alone discovered to have been wrong. — Janus
Perhaps you're misconstruing what was said. — praxis
Can you give an example? — praxis
Can you give an example?
— praxis
Not really no. The comment was on the presumption of this distinction Janus was making between a mental state and an expressed belief. A belief as a mental state has no barrier to being contradictory. Beliefs here are simply propensities to act as if some state of affairs were the case and such a propensity is carried in the brain by dynamic networks. Since these are stochastic and unstable, it's perfectly possible to hold contradictory beliefs (propensities to act as if two contradictory states of affairs were the case). In fact, it's quite a normal state.
If you thought to yourself 'now, where's my keys' the image or concept of their location that comes to you would be the result of a resolution of that network at the state it's in at the time.
As for 'feeling sure'... Feelings are all post hoc narratives invented after the event. One could 'feel' anything which makes some sense of what just happened. It tells us absolutely nothing beyond our abilities as storytellers. — Isaac
Feelings are all post hoc narratives — Isaac
"credit upon the grounds of authority or testimony without complete demonstration, accept as true" is belief without certainty, which I do not see as problematic.
— Banno
Take the 2020 American presidential election, for instance. Trump was a leader and an authority figure who made a claim that his supporters 'felt sure' was true, despite a lack of supporting evidence. This sort of thing is characterized as a "big lie". You're cool with big lies? This directly relates to Ken Edwards's experience in WW2, btw. — praxis
Then I don't really see the conflict with what Banno is saying. — Isaac
You absolutely could. It's perfectly possible to believe (even to feel sure of) two contradictory things at once, people do it all the time. What one can't do is act on both beliefs, but one can hold both beliefs. Were it not possible, each alternative would have to be completely modelled from scratch in the brain as an when it was needed. — Isaac
Here:
I believe the keys are in the car, but I might be wrong
I am certain that the keys are in the car, but I might be wrong.
Do we agree that there is a problem with the second sentence, but not with the first? — Banno
Since these are stochastic and unstable, it's perfectly possible to hold contradictory beliefs (propensities to act as if two contradictory states of affairs were the case). In fact, it's quite a normal state. — Isaac
'I believe the keys are likely to be in the car' is more consistent. That is keys being in the car seems to be the most plausible option, but of course they may not be. I cannot, without contradiction, simultaneously believe the keys are without doubt in the car, and believe that that they may not be. If I acknowledge that they may not be in the car, then it would be absurd to firmly believe they are in the car. — Janus
I'm not going to explain this again... — Janus
This has been shown to be wrong. With it your position collapses.It is not possible to believe something without feeling certain about it. — Janus
One day the plant believes (has a propensity to act) that the sun is in the East and the next day it believes the sun is in the West, dynamically adapting to the circumstances of the moment. — praxis
Philosophers sometimes forget that appeals to rationality are themselves normative. That we are sometimes irrational means we can ask if we ought be rational. — Banno
So we agree that (1) is consistent, (2) is contradictory. — Banno
It is not possible to believe something without feeling certain about it. — Janus
This has been shown to be wrong. With it your position collapses. — Banno
Interesting you put it like this. Does the plant not move towards the same direction each time and if it must have beliefs, could it not feel it has been moved? :razz: — Tom Storm
That's discomforting - does it suggest a moral dimension to the use of reason? Do you feel that the use of reason as a foundational principle is tendentious? I imagine postmodernists might say reason is a construct of no particular merit, except when located in the value system of an intersubjective community. Do we forfeit conventional communication if reason is no longer priviledged? — Tom Storm
If they have an abortion does that mean that they never actually believed in the pro-life movement? It would appear so. — praxis
It's perfectly possible to believe (even to feel sure of) two contradictory things at once, people do it all the time. — Isaac
This person becomes pregnant and due to circumstances that are out of their control they desire an abortion and therefore have the propensity to act in ways that are contrary to the pro-life movement. If they have an abortion does that mean that they never actually believed in the pro-life movement? — praxis
Similarly, from Janus' contention that we must be certain of our beliefs and yet we can acknowledge that our beliefs might be wrong, we can conclude that Janus has gone astray somewhere. — Banno
Do you agree that there is a problem with the second sentence, but not with the first? Am I wrong here, and if so, how? — Banno
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.