How so? One can just as easily believe something to be false.
-
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!
Is a Belief a Claim?
- Thread starter SalixIncendium
- Start date
PureX
Veteran Member
Only if you think there is a chance that Elvis is still alive. If you do not believe Elvis is still alive, and you meet someone that says Elvis is still alive, evidence is not the issue. Because you have already decided that Elvis is not alive. The issue is why does this person think Elvis is still alive? And all you can do is ask them. Demanding evidence is disingenuous. And here is why ...
When you demand the "evidence" for their belief that Elvis lives, you are setting up your own little 'kangaroo court' wherein you want to play the role of judge even though you have already decided that Elvis is dead, and therefor any evidence to the contrary must be determined invalid.
We see this happening all the time on these threads. The theist says, "God is real" and the atheist says, "show me the evidence". Because the atheist is setting up his own little 'kangaroo court' in which he gets to play the judge even though he has already clearly decided that God is delusion. And that, therefor, whetver evidence the theist presents must be deemed invalid.
It's not a discussion, its a condemnation pretending to look like a discussion.
Adding "to be true" is just an intensifier for rhetorical purposes, similar to saying "I do believe it."
It could also be used for clarification. For instance, if some people in the conversation are saying that a claim is false, then saying that you believe it to be true can help prevent being misheard.
PureX
Veteran Member
Only if you think there is a chance that Elvis is still alive. If you do not believe Elvis is still alive, and you meet someone that says Elvis is still alive, evidence is not the issue. Because you have already decided that Elvis is not alive. The issue is why does this person think Elvis is still alive? And all you can do is ask them. Demanding evidence is disingenuous. And here is why ...
When you demand the "evidence" for their belief that Elvis lives, you are setting up your own little 'kangaroo court' wherein you want to play the role of judge even though you have already decided that Elvis is dead, and therefor any evidence to the contrary must be determined invalid.
We see this happening all the time on these threads. The theist says, "God is real" and the atheist says, "show me the evidence". Because the atheist is setting up his own little 'kangaroo court' in which he gets to play the judge even though he has already decided that God is delusion and that, therefor, whatever evidence the theist presents must be deemed invalid.
It's not a discussion or an inquiry, its a condemnation pretending to look like a discussion and/or inquiry.
In isolation, if X is an idea that could be true or false, when you say "I believe X," period, it's implied that you believe X to be true.
PureX
Veteran Member
Yes, but believing it to be true is not the issue. The issue is insisting that YOU also believe that it's true. And that's actually fairly rare.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Of course, establishing a belief requires an objective component , since the belief in question almost always describes an objective component of that belief.
If it's not important to establish anything, then that person must be satisfied it's just their own belief and nobody else's.
Heyo
Veteran Member
You are right, what @ChristineM said in post #10 is correct. The "I believe" is the important part and puts parenthesis around the rest as "not a claim".
I disagree. People often base their beliefs in subjective experiences. Often there are no objective components available.
I believe that you're incorrect.
Frankly, I think that's nonsense. I can compare it to Q-Anon conspiracy theory belief. As you can see below, this "belief" contains within it much that can damage many individuals, mentioned by name. It seems eminently obvious to me that such a belief should be questioned.
QAnon is an American political conspiracy theory and political movement. It originated in the American far-right political sphere in 2017. QAnon centers on fabricated claims made by an anonymous individual or individuals known as "Q". Those claims have been relayed and developed by online communities and influencers. Their core belief is that a cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic child molesters are operating a global child sex trafficking ring which conspired against Donald Trump. QAnon has direct roots in Pizzagate, an Internet conspiracy theory that appeared one year earlier, but also incorporates elements of many other theories. QAnon has been described as a cult.
Followers believe the Trump administration secretly fought the cabal of pedophiles, and would conduct arrests and executions of thousands of cabal members on a day known as "the Storm" or "the Event". QAnon conspiracy believers have named Democratic politicians, Hollywood actors, high-ranking government officials, business tycoons, and medical experts as members of the cabal. QAnon has also claimed that Trump stimulated the conspiracy of Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election to enlist Robert Mueller to join him in exposing the sex trafficking ring, and to prevent a coup d'état by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and George Soros. QAnon is described as antisemitic or rooted in antisemitic tropes, due to its fixation on Jewish financier Soros and conspiracy theories about the Rothschild family, a frequent target of antisemites.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Yes, the way this is being used is with a belief that a religion is true. But the person knows she can't "prove" the religion is true, so she asserts that she does not "claim" that it's true. But people do believe the claims made by this religion are true and factual. And their religion tells them to go out and announce to the world that indeed and for a fact, the "promised one" has come.
Of course, as soon as a person in that religion makes the claim that their prophet has been sent by God to teach us the way to live in peace, some of us ask them, "What proof or evidence do you have to support these claims." And they do provide what they believe to be evidence. In fact, this particular person has provided what her religion says is the evidence.
But then she says, "But there is no proof". And therefore, she says, because there is no "proof", the claims can't be shown to be factual. So, rather than "claiming" her religion is true, she says that she "believes" her religion is true. And, because it is just a "belief", she is not required to support anything she says about her religion, even though it sounds like she is making claims.
But does it really matter? The members of this religion say it is true. They believe it is true. They go out and tell people it is true. And they live their lives as if it is true. In fact, their religion has all kinds of laws that the followers are expected to follow and obey. Why would they do this if they didn't believe their religion was The Truth?
Yet, they don't "claim" it is true? They only "believe" it is true? If they can't "claim" it, then why "believe" it? Since several hundreds, maybe thousands, have given their lives and been martyred for their "belief" in this religion, I think that most believers in this religion are claiming.... it is the truth.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
There is the objective person by whom the subjective imagination is animated through giving it the illusion it is real.
Subjectivity alone means it's pure imagination or conjecture that has no real impact on material matter by itself , unless of course if ones material composition acts on behalf of the subjective imagination, touting there is a reality to whatever is conjured up through ones imagination and embellishments when there isn't one aside from oneself.
It's spurious whenever the object of one's imagination always needs and requires objective help, but never the subjective itself on it's own without any help, which will do of course absolutely nothing and has no impact on anything around it in the material realm.
Actually, I've found that religious often tend not to live as if their religion is true.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Yes, you are making a claim about your belief, in the sense that "I believe in Santa Claus" is most likely a true claim for a child.
No, people have freedom of belief.
Not unless there is some threat that is implied by the expression of that belief, for example when someone in a position of trust publicly states that they believe that something is benign when it is actually dangerous.
Last edited:
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
It's because of the tradition of faith. This tradition is institutional, for example via the title of "Defender of the Faith". The relationship between faith and knowledge in this tradition goes back to justification, in that people can be justified by specific belief or by specific knowledge.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
And I believe that is true.
OK.... I am not a language teacher but I am capable to learn if there is a succinct difference.
OK. In any case, whether identified as a belief or a claim; anyone can make them. Qualifying them to a category is a choice just like making the claim/belief is an individual choice.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, you are not making a claim unless you are asserting that something is true.
So, saying "I believe that x is true" is not a claim. Saying "x is true" is a claim.
Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
claim means - Google Search
Claim: to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it: claim
No, a belief does not have to be supported by 'any' evidence, not unless the believer is trying to convince the audience that their belief is true.
No, and a religious belief cannot be proven false since it is not subject to being proven either true or false.