Belief and Knowledge

[Falvlun]

Belief is fixed, knowledge is flow, we are always learning something new, to believe in any something from that knowledge is to again fix it, put it in a box.

Weird imagery. I would consider it the opposite: belief is mutable, changeable, and ideally, knowledge is fixed.

 

[Falvlun]

I believe there is a god.

I know the earth orbits the sun.

I'm certain that I exist.

Is "certain" a separate category from belief and knowledge?

 

[Falvlun]

Acceptance of a premise or claim as true.


Justified true belief.


Knowledge is a subset of belief.

That's the precise philosophical framework I've been operating off of.

The issue I've been running into is that "justified true belief" seems to be the objective standard, but not necessarily the definition used in practice. People can say that they know something, but it turns out to be false. So what definition are people using when they say "I know"?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I like the stepping stone imagery.

Do you think something stops being a belief when it become knowledge? How do we know when something has been confirmed?

Actually, yes. For example, I've always "believed in" ancestral spirits and spirits in general. When I experience seeing a spirit, it was years ago. So, it was mainly a belief hanging there. Faith. But after my grandmother passed away and actually experiencing and physically interacting with my grandmothers again, that confirmed my belief. So now I know my grandmothers are here in spirit.

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.

Nothing wrong with that. When you have confirmation that what you believe or invested your trust in is worth it, and you are more open to other signs, then religious view, it becomes knowledge.

What confirmations you received that let you know god is a fact not a belief?

 

[1137]

Is "certain" a separate category from belief and knowledge?

If we want to say we can know anything, and not mean absolute certainty, yes. When we say we know the earth orbits the sun, we still leave room for any type of skepticism or crazy revelation. Maybe the earth doesn't orbit the sun because none of this exists, we're a simulation. Maybe it doesn't because nothing exists except our mind, or we are part of some brain in a vat experiment.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's the precise philosophical framework I've been operating off of.

The issue I've been running into is that "justified true belief" seems to be the objective standard, but not necessarily the definition used in practice. People can say that they know something, but it turns out to be false. So what definition are people using when they say "I know"?

I think that's the definition that people use. It's just that they're using based on their own judgement, which is sometimes wrong.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If we want to say we can know anything, and not mean absolute certainty, yes. When we say we know the earth orbits the sun, we still leave room for any type of skepticism or crazy revelation. Maybe the earth doesn't orbit the sun because none of this exists, we're a simulation. Maybe it doesn't because nothing exists except our mind, or we are part of some brain in a vat experiment.

I question whether you can be certain that you exist.

There are problems with "I think, therefore I am."

 

[icehorse]

If we want to say we can know anything, and not mean absolute certainty, yes. When we say we know the earth orbits the sun, we still leave room for any type of skepticism or crazy revelation. Maybe the earth doesn't orbit the sun because none of this exists, we're a simulation. Maybe it doesn't because nothing exists except our mind, or we are part of some brain in a vat experiment.

Sure, philosophically we can't know for sure that we're not in a simulation. That said, we can reliably predict that the Sun will "rise" again tomorrow morning. It's that reliability and predictability that usually separates knowledge from belief.

 

[1137]

I question whether you can be certain that you exist.

There are problems with "I think, therefore I am."

I've asked you to reject self existence dozens of times and you've never even attempted to. Sorry if I don't believe you on blind faith.

 

[Willamena]

What is the difference between an attitude that is genuine vs one that has been adopted?

Awareness, so intent. A genuine attitude is unaware and unintended.

I think your description of belief and knowledge is spot on. I especially like the description of belief as a "practical need for reality."

But, I've been thinking about this apparent disconnect between our concept of what knowledge is and what we actually consider knowledge.

We all conceive of knowledge as this pool of facts that accurately reflect reality. That's our concept of knowledge.

But, in practice, how do we determine that something is true?

Ontology is the craft (some call it study) of posing things to be the case (true). Posing, like artists with their sketch doll, but we do it in thought. In doing that, we use the verb "to be" and its derivatives. We do it in speaking, but we also do it in thought, and without thought. We pose the world "to be."

Imagine yourself invested with, for instance, a fear of something, it doesn't matter what. All the things that can be proposed about that situation in words are things that can be believed. Of those things that can be proposed, some will be true and some will not. That you know which are true are not doesn't matter [and can even be a contradiction]. If they appear to be the case, you'll believe them. But of all the things you believe, the ones that are true are knowledge*. You don't have to know which are knowledge--to you, knowledge and belief may appear identical. Knowledge will be the belief that is posed "to be," in thought, and without thought. Propositions: You are afraid. Fear has gripped you. You are going to run. The monster is chasing you. These propositions, as they represent the world (in thought), are worded objectively to be the case, that are the case, and so we house them in the verb "to be."

You see, it's not really about you, or me, or any of us. We house them in the verb "to be" because we cannot but have identified truth about them that is beyond us. They are the world to us.

*The case of "fiction" was devised just for the ability to pose things as if true. But the case of "real" is the case where the truth of a thing is beyond us.

When we say "I know" it seems to be more a statement of certainty: I am certain this is true.

I don't find it practical to see the world that way. Certainty has inherent doubt, i.e. no truth value.

 

[RedDragon94]

What is belief?

Belief is a subjective proposition on any subject of your choice. It is open to change.

What is knowledge?

Knowledge is the obtaining of facts. Knowledge grows more than it changes.

What, if any, is the relation between them?

Beliefs should be built on knowledge.

 

[YmirGF]

The problem being, of course, how do we determine reality?

That happens when a bunch of us look up and agree, "Yes. The sky is blue." Reality is when something is proven as being factual based on evidence, observations and clears the hurdle of the test of time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've asked you to reject self existence dozens of times and you've never even attempted to. Sorry if I don't believe you on blind faith.

Sure you did.

So you're looking for something like this?

"I think, therefore I am" doesn't actually work when you unpack it. Descartes assumed things about how thought works that conflict with our understanding of neurology today.

The key thing in "I think, therefore I am" is the idea that as I am thinking, I am simultaneously aware that I am thinking; however, even though this process feels simultaneous, it isn't. When we're "aware" that we're thinking, we're actually switching back and forth rapidly between thinking about the main focus of our thoughts and self-awareness of our thinking process. What we're actually experiencing is not the thought as we're thinking it, but the memory of thinking it from a split second before. This means that "I think, therefore I am" is subject to all the problems with the potential for false memories that Descartes identified.

 

[idav]

I think this is a usual understanding. But, since confirmation is different for everyone, does knowledge have any, or require any, actual relationship to the truth? Can I say that I know something that turns out to be false?

Yeah sometimes we can be wrong when we take a stab at the truth without full certainty. The other way could be true, someone could be say 70% certain but it's knowledge if it's true whether or not we fully acknowledge it at the time.

 

[Willamena]

That happens when a bunch of us look up and agree, "Yes. The sky is blue." Reality is when something is proven as being factual based on evidence, observations and clears the hurdle of the test of time.

What if you're all alone in an open field?

 

[1137]

Sure you did.

So you're looking for something like this?

I must be missing where this at all suggests the self doesn't actually exist.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I must be missing where this at all suggests the self doesn't actually exist.

If you think that's what I was arguing, then you weren't paying attention.

 

[1137]

If you think that's what I was arguing, then you weren't paying attention.

Lol but that's what I asked you for, and what you replied with. My god...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Lol but that's what I asked you for, and what you replied with. My god...

Here's what I actually said:

I question whether you can be certain that you exist.

There are problems with "I think, therefore I am."

However you got that turned around in your head is your problem.

 

[YmirGF]

What if you're all alone in an open field?

The first time out... ponder...
The second time out... Go "Hmmmm"
The third time out... Think... "Just might be"
The fourth time out... Think... "Looks compelling..."
The fifth time out... Think... "Studies have shown."