psychoslice
Veteran Member
I see it the other way around, but that is not my belief lol.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Belief and Knowledge
- Thread starter Falvlun
- Start date
Philosophically, it's not possible to genuinely believe that reality is simulated. Its doubt is nothing more than a mind game.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
I would say that knowledge is awareness of proven fact; that there is no possibility that anything else is 'true.'
Belief is awareness that something is probably true, based upon whatever evidence is available.
Faith is the willingness to act upon belief; to act as if one's belief reaches all the way to 'knowledge' even when it doesn't.
Example:
I believe that the sun is shining right now; the sky is blue, I feel the warmth of it through the window, I see the light. However...
I KNOW that it was shining around eight minutes ago. There is no possibility that it was not. There is, however a possibility (though infinitesimally slight) that it blew up sometime within the last eight minutes.
Because I have faith that the sun is shining right now, I'll put sunblock on and go dead head my daffodils.
In other words, 'knowledge' is a whole 'nuther level of awareness than 'belief' is, and most of our lives are lived according to what we believe rather than what we 'know.'
Another example:
Up on the Montana/Idaho border there is...er, was...a suspension bridge over the Salmon river that my dad used to use, and that my cousins used up until, er, yesterday.
They BELIEVED that the bridge would hold them up when they crossed, and they've been right about that for a long time. However, as of yesterday, that belief proved false.
On the other hand, they KNOW that the bridge DID hold them up when they used to cross it.
I certainly do not think that even though their faith in the bridge up until yesterday was sound, I rather doubt that any of 'em would have the faith to try to use it today.
Belief is awareness that something is probably true, based upon whatever evidence is available.
Faith is the willingness to act upon belief; to act as if one's belief reaches all the way to 'knowledge' even when it doesn't.
Example:
I believe that the sun is shining right now; the sky is blue, I feel the warmth of it through the window, I see the light. However...
I KNOW that it was shining around eight minutes ago. There is no possibility that it was not. There is, however a possibility (though infinitesimally slight) that it blew up sometime within the last eight minutes.
Because I have faith that the sun is shining right now, I'll put sunblock on and go dead head my daffodils.
In other words, 'knowledge' is a whole 'nuther level of awareness than 'belief' is, and most of our lives are lived according to what we believe rather than what we 'know.'
Another example:
Up on the Montana/Idaho border there is...er, was...a suspension bridge over the Salmon river that my dad used to use, and that my cousins used up until, er, yesterday.
They BELIEVED that the bridge would hold them up when they crossed, and they've been right about that for a long time. However, as of yesterday, that belief proved false.
On the other hand, they KNOW that the bridge DID hold them up when they used to cross it.
I certainly do not think that even though their faith in the bridge up until yesterday was sound, I rather doubt that any of 'em would have the faith to try to use it today.
To a large extent, belief is a statement of personal inclinations, while knowledge is supposed to be calibrated by external parameters and to be subject to revision according to new facts or learning.
The two superimpose when there are no external data available or when the subject matter is very personal in nature.
what is evolution? is it the experience or is it the narrative? If I say evolution what is the first thing that comes to mind? Is that which first comes to mind evolution itself?
Curious George
Veteran Member
Slow change or movement towards complexity, contrasted with abrupt change or degradation. That is the first thing which comes to mind. The next examples of change that would fit the word evolution. Such as the evolution of a species, or the evolution of writing.
The question becomes is evolution involved at the level of thinking itself not simply at the ideas arrived at and put into writing and narrative. In a sense is evolution is dictating how we understand evolution rather than us determining what exactly evolution is? I have a degree in theology and occasionally people assume all kinds of fantasy ideas of what the implies. I have had people ask me "what about evolution" like an Ah HA thingy I have intellectually gotcha. My comment is always "congratulations a dog is an evolutionist you are now almost as smart as a dog, almost. stating the obvious as if it's meaningful is not science, it's cluelessness, being called science". I already know the replies and to those I already have my responses. So the question becomes what the hell am I looking at? and what the hell am I talking about when I cut the cranium off the human head and replace it with a dog's brain?
I think this is where we part ways. I think blind faith is a type of belief: not all belief is blind faith.It's like a relationship (which I'm learning about at the moment). You have the infatuation stage. We believe a lot of things about our friend that may or may not be true. I feel that's natural. I mean, how do we experience the awesomeness of the roller coaster if we put down the anxiety of going up hill and the thrill of going down hill. Belief is like that, what we are learning to trust but don't know. Probably why they call it blind faith.
Don't you see a middle ground between accepting something is true without any evidence (blind faith) and confirming that something is true (knowledge)?
I think "belief" encompasses that middle ground, where we can have some evidence, arguments, or reasons for believing something, but maybe not enough proof to consider it knowledge.
I don't believe gods exist. I believe this is true, but I wouldn't consider it knowledge.
If knowledge leaves room for skepticism, then how is it different from belief?
In other words, I think that beliefs are things we consider true, without being certain of their truth, while knowledge is things we consider true, while being certain that they are.
Is it wrong to call something knowledge that turns out to be false, or is it permissible?
In other words, can knowledge be false as long as someone, based on their own judgement, believes it to be justified and true?
I don't get your "wrong/permissible" dichotomy. If a person judges a belief to be "knowledge" and the beliefs later proves to be incorrect, then the judgement was incorrect. Maybe the judgement was sincere, and maybe it was based on the best information available at the time, but still ultimately incorrect.
If it was false, it was never knowledge.
Just because someone judges some belief to be knowledge doesn't mean that it necessarily is knowledge. People's judgements are sometimes mistaken.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
That doesn't surprise me. What DOES is that Barack Obama was elected.....twice.
Why should it surprise people a second time when the majority population elects a person the first time. What should surprise people is electing a Republican president in a country with majority population being Democrat.
We are certain of almost nothing.
littlefire
You can call me Fio
@9-10ths_Penguin I agree that knowledge is a subset a belief. The ways we "know" things come from experience/observation, tradition, or reason, but I think modern humanity stripped down the tradition category a lot to distinguish "knowledge" from belief or faith.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
It's not, IMO.
Yes...if you define 'certain' as 'there is no possibility that you are wrong about this." Indeed, there is precious little that we do actually KNOW, any of us.
The question speaks to the heart of how knowledge is defined by the individual: if truth is involved in knowledge at all, then it would only be by permission that something false is allowed to be [as if] true.
Are you certain of that?
Of course. Then it gets bumped down to 'belief."
What is used to justify it is usually and normally momentary and sporadic. "My mom said so," can be justification. What's important isn't the justified part of JTB, but the true part.