How so? I am neither cold or violent, and this is how I base my beliefs. It also seems self evidence that beliefs without any evidence whatsoever have resulted in "a cold violent world".
I haven't claimed you to be personally cold or violent, but humanity is both. Your personal experience living in a brief bubble of freedom and wealth does not generalize to the overall experience of the human race. Your beliefs began with reason and were never based on anything else? I have a difficult time imagining how you skipped childhood.
Well I'm not an educated man of course, but it seems to me you can do just that, by definition.
Ignorance
noun
- lack of knowledge or information.
Fight ignorance merely with knowledge? This needs a bit more dismal reality. There is so much knowledge and reason available, yet knowledgeable people turn away and do nothing or participate in violence. Some fatten themselves with knowledge that they starve others of. Many with the ability to gain knowledge prefer entertainments and treats. More thinking costs more energy, so by default people don't think more. You have to believe first that evidence is something worth straining for, so evidence based belief is useless without choice based belief first. You choose to believe that evidence is required, but you could choose not to. You could choose to sit upon your duff and to learn nothing, too.
Lets not resort to generic condemnation just yet, I rather I was asking people how their beliefs can be falsified, not commenting on why they think it is ok to hold unfalsifiable beliefs, one step at a time if that makes sense.
In the OP you challenge: "If of course they can't then how can you rationally justify disbelieving other unfalsifiable beliefs...?" To which I replied "Belief from the heart (I explain 'Heart' in the last part of this post) without evidence seems to be what paves the way for people to consider and to use evidence based belief." In other words there is no choice for a human but to make belief based choices without evidence, but we can learn to appreciate evidence. The choice to believe in evidence is itself a leap of faith. It is a world accepting choice, a psychological leap. It is not easy for everyone and takes more effort than your giving credit for, as if it were a simple matter of weighing justifications with semantics.
Well yes, hence my question, if one holds one belief that is unfalsifiable, then there is no criteria to disbelieve other unfalsifiable beliefs, not objectively anyway.
Morality is subjective wouldn't you agree?
Why do you think people must justify beliefs if you believe morality to be subjective? It is suggesting we can live peacefully without any shared morality. If you will agree that common morality is a necessity, then I will agree that it is subjective. A subjective but necessary thing perhaps, and then if it is necessary but subjective how do you choose the correct common morality since it is subjective? Its by belief, however you rule out falsifiable belief as a solution when you declare morality to be subjective. If morality is necessary and subjective then so is belief without evidence and perhaps moreso then falsifiable belief.
Well I think good and evil are subjective of course, so the choice must inevitably be subjective.
No offence but I don't know what you mean here? I use my brain to decide what I accept is true, I understand here that heart is a metaphor for emotion, I try not to base belief on emotion, why on earth would I?
Heart is my metaphor for your inner motivational process, not your logical comparative process. Thinking depends upon feelings, all of the desires, motivations and processes already in progress such as habitual thinking. I'm referring to your urges, your feelings, your imaginations and myriad illogical drives many of which make little sense, many of which must be suppressed and ignored at times. Sometimes these are the raw materials that you cobble together into ideas. Fear is a heart thing. You don't logically fear. You just fear, but fear can be a motivation to make decisions. Its like a raw material. Thus you have your heart versus your logical process a process which depends upon but overrides the heart sometimes. Both are part of your brain I would say. When you decide what to accept as true that is often a much smaller part of you making such a decision. It is your final choice, however there is much more going on underneath. Rationality is like a ship upon an ocean of other things, a ship that can be beset by storms. Even a developed person and a mature person has a powerful set of urges and feelings underlying their most rational thinking. These ought to eventually become sources of strength, but they are by nature also chaotic.
