You might well guess that I’m holding a phone. If you did guess that, would you believe it? — praxis

Yes. To a degree.

You can test this quite easily by asking me to bet on whether you're holding a phone or a small pig. I'd put more money on the phone. I believe the phone prediction more.

:up:

Nice attempt at correction.

I am reminded of Russell here who, like Kenny and yourself, also drew a distinction between faith and belief. Christianity has a well-established history of holding unshakable absolute certainty in some of their beliefs - as you've noted - even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Hence... Christian apologetics is faith-based, and makes concerted attempts at placing the evidence against the God of Abraham into question. Christians will even go so far as to be proud of themselves for maintaining absolute certainty in these beliefs. It is cultivated, praised, sought after, and rewarded amongst Christian communities.

"Walk by faith not by sight" is a common phrase supporting the idea to consciously and willfully ignore all the evidence against the God of Abraham that is plain to see...

All I'm advocating is that we call what is certain (in the sense that we can't imagine what its being false could look like) knowledge, and that we call what we feel certain about belief. — Janus

One can be certain and wrong. Thus, certainty does not equate to, nor does it always indicate knowledge.

If 'X' is certain, do we not also feel certain about 'X'? In other words, I do not think you've drawn a distinction here. According to what you've said above, 'X' is both knowledge and belief.

Isn’t that just your associative memory at work, guessing it’s a phone, and if you put more thought into it you might think that I would try to make it hard to guess and deliberately not use a phone. I’d love to hold a cute little pig though.

Suddenly it occurs to me now how much belief is a story or personal narrative for ourselves, our ego, strengthening individual as well as group identity.

One can be certain and wrong. Thus, certainty does not equate to, nor does it always indicate knowledge.

If 'X' is certain, do we not also feel certain about 'X'? In other words, I do not think you've drawn a distinction here. According to what you've said above, 'X' is both knowledge and belief. — creativesoul

We cannot be certain and wrong, but we can feel certain and be wrong. Of course if you are certain you also feel certain, but the converse does not follow; i.e. we can feel certain even we are not. For example I might feel certain that God exists, but I obviously cannot be certain about that.

We cannot be certain and wrong, but we can feel certain and be wrong. — Janus

Seems that "be certain" means the subject is true. An odd phrasing that leads Janus astray.

Yeah, we could swap some terms and likely make some sort of sense. Perhaps introducing how truth works in belief statements may be on the menu here.

"Certainty" is a term mostly used to indicate the level of confidence than an individual has that something or another is true and/or is the case. Let that something be X. When and where the confidence is highest, the individual has no doubt about X, and thus such individuals are certain that X is the case or that 'X' is true.







Being certain and feeling certain are the very same thing. Being true and being certain are not.

We begin to temper our confidence(and thus rethink our own certainty that X is the case or that 'X' is true) only after having become aware of our fallibility and mastering language that is replete with the ability to talk about our own mistakes. Skepticism based upon percentages and probabilities seems unhelpful here as far as I can tell. That applies to only the cases after we've become aware of our own fallibility. Certainty and belief precedes that.

We're certain that X is the case and/or that 'X' is true long before we become equipped with the language capacity to be able to apply probabilistic terminology to our beliefs, or to 'measure' our certainty in such terms.

Being certain and feeling certain are the very same thing. Being true and being certain are not. — creativesoul

:up:

Isn’t that just your associative memory at work, guessing it’s a phone, and if you put more thought into it you might think that I would try to make it hard to guess and deliberately not use a phone. I’d love to hold a cute little pig though. — praxis

Yep. I might update my belief about the content of your hand to make it better fit other beliefs (like those about your intentions, character etc)

Suddenly it occurs to me now how much belief is a story or personal narrative for ourselves, our ego, strengthening individual as well as group identity. — praxis

Exactly.

Suddenly it occurs to me now how much belief is a story or personal narrative for ourselves, our ego, strengthening individual as well as group identity.
— praxis

Exactly. — Isaac

MAGA world is prima facie evidence of the power of belief, as well as how easily others can directly influence our worldviews and behaviors. Intentionally creating all the necessary preconditions from which mass delusion emerges; a carefully planned coordinated effort to defraud The United States of America, is exactly what Trump and his close circle of co-conspirators successfully achieved.

So many bought into the big lie that we're suffering from a country with untold(perhaps hundreds of???) millions of people suffering from mass delusion or cognitive dissonance as a direct result of it. All the while Trump's personal versions of "Go Fund Me" were raking in hundreds of millions from those who trusted that Trump was telling the truth. His lies were layered. The supporters donated for the specified cause of helping fund a 'legal' fight that was unfounded to begin with and everyone already knew that. Untold numbers of judges threw the cases out as a result. It's no secret. Those allegations were being publicly presented to Trump supporters in such a way as to convince them that there was something to fight against. This was also being waged by so-called 'attorneys' who knew they had no evidence to support those very serious charges that Trump and others were making then, and continue to do so now.

There are some similarities between Trump supporters' unshakable conviction(unquestioned trust in the truthfulness of Trump's speech) and the religious faith being discussed here...

Seems that "be certain" means the subject is true. An odd phrasing that leads Janus astray. — Banno

No being certain means knowing that the subject is true.The subject being true and knowing that the subject is true are not the same. Your lazy reading and/or thinking is leading you astray.

Being certain and feeling certain are the very same thing. Being true and being certain are not. — creativesoul

See above; you are making the same mistake as Banno. You ignored my example that clearly shows they are not the same: to repeat, one can feel certain that God exists, but one cannot be certain, i.e. know, that God exists.

one can feel certain that God exists — Janus

A statement of belief.

but one cannot be certain, i.e. know. that God exists. — Janus

Knowledge of object.

And?

Agreeing with you, that's it.

OK, that wasn't clear to me but :cool:

Seems that "be certain" means the subject is true. An odd phrasing that leads Janus astray.
— Banno

No being certain means knowing that the subject is true. — Janus

With sentences like that, is it a surprise I have not understood you?

Is this "No level of certainty implies knowing the subject is true" or is this "No, you are wrong, Banno, being certain implies knowing that the subject is true", or something else?

With sentences like that, is it a surprise I have not understood you?

Is this "No level of certainty implies knowing the subject is true" or is this "No, you are wrong, Banno, being certain implies knowing that the subject is true", or something else? — Banno

OK, fair enough, I overlooked a comma, thus rendering the sentence open to ambiguous interpretation. It should be ' No, being certain means knowing the subject is true', as opposed to your previous interpretation that asserted I was saying 'Being certain means the subject is true". Apologies for my sloppy (lack of) punctuation.

Cheers. SO now we have you asserting:

being certain means knowing the subject is true' — Janus

And this is as opposed to a mootted

feeling certain does not mean knowing the subject is true' — Janus

Is that it?

Feeling certain does not necessarily mean knowing the subject is true, as the example of feeling certain that God exists shows. Of course being certain includes feeling certain, though, which means that some instances of feeling certain do mean knowing the subject is true.

Some of these long threads almost need a 'what have we arrived at so far' summary.

Do we have a working definition for belief now? I always thought it was 'that I hold something to be the case.' Being certain doesn't change the status of what I think, just my confidence in it.

Suzy was certain that she'd won the lottery, but she was wrong.

Suzy believed her shoes allowed her to fly, but she installed a net below her window just in case.

It's all in how you glop the words together.

Feeling certain does not necessarily mean knowing the subject is true, as the example of feeling certain that God exists shows. Of course being certain includes feeling certain, though, which means that some instances of feeling certain do mean knowing the subject is true. — Janus

So being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true.

*

So being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true. — Banno

Being certain of something is knowing that it is true.

Do we have a working definition for belief now? — Tom Storm

Always have had. We believe something if we take it to be true. Hence the error of @Ken Edwards's OP, which claims that we ought not believe anything.

Remember Ken Edwards? This is his thread. Everything else is just @Janus being confused.

So being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true.
— Banno

Being certain of something is knowing that it is true. — Janus

...so being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true, and it's being justified?

Why add "knowing"?

You just seem to be trying, by tendentiously paraphrasing what I've said, and by making asides to others about my purported "confusion", to worm out of having to admit you were wrong to say that being certain and feeling certain are the same. I have clearly shown they are not, so it is you that is confused, not me.

Why add "knowing"? — Banno

Can you know something without knowing it? Are you certain of anything? If so, do you know it is true or not? Do you feel certain of anything that you don't know to be true?

↪Banno You just seem to be trying, by tendentiously paraphrasing what I've said, and by making asides to others about my purported "confusion", to worm out of having to admit you were wrong to say that being certain and feeling certain are the same. I have clearly shown they are not, so it you that is confused, not I. — Janus

To be sure, it is clear that you make a distinction here. What I've been doing is trying to draw out form you what that distinction is. I think I hit on it here:

So being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true. — Banno

That is, what you call "being certain" is just what the rest of us would call feeling or being certain of something that is indeed true.

You idea is a confusion - literally, "act of mingling together two or more things or notions properly separate" - Etymology online. You con fuse together "certainty" and "truth" in order to invent a new category and extend Ken's thread indefinitely.

I think my work here is done.

To be sure, it is clear that you make a distinction here. What I've been doing is trying to draw out form you what that distinction is. I think I hit on it here:

So being certain is just feeling certain of something, and that thing being true. — Banno — Banno

No you complicated it to make it seem confused, when it isn't. You conveniently failed to answer my questions:

Can you know something without knowing it? Are you certain of anything? If so, do you know it is true or not? Do you feel certain of anything that you don't know to be true? — Janus

in answer to this:

Why add "knowing"? — Banno

You're looking distinctly disingenuous now.

I think my work here is done. — Banno

Then you'd be wrong; your work has not even begun.