Jan Ardena:
Belief only requires that an individual adopts a certain view of things, right or wrong. Knowledge, on the other hand, requires justification and truth. Knowledge requires us to look at the real world, not just at the person holding the view. Belief, on the other hand, is subjective. This is why it is possible to hold a false belief, but not false knowledge.
The fact that you are struggling so with this simple example speaks volumes about you.
How do you possibly hope to be able to discuss God rationally if your level of logical sophistication can't cope with a discussion about belief in the capital of France?
I notice you skipped over the most important part of my post, in terms of the current topic, which is fairly typical of you. Here it is again. I suggest you attempt a response.
Then you skipped an entire post of mine, in which I examined what you said about having reasons for a belief, how one can hold a false belief despite having a reason and why a reason can't turn a false belief into a true belief. I also discussed mistaken beliefs.
Moving on....
Yes it does. If it's not true, then it is a false belief. Whether it is learned or dreamt up independently, if it doesn't match the facts it is a false belief. Like I explained, previously. And Sarkus. And Baldeee.Then one believes what one has learnt. It doesn't make it a "false belief".
Yes. A firm false belief.No. One person has a firm belief in the process of acquiring that knowledge.
Adjustments that are simple for some are apparently very hard for others to make.Upon realising the his answer is incorrect, he only needs to make a simple adjustment.
It's correct. As for psychological damage to fragile egos, that's a separate matter. Certainly the fragility of a person's mind should be borne in mind and their false beliefs should be pointed out gently if they are likely to have problems when hit with the reality stick. Possibly some people are too fragile and should be left alone, even if they have certain false beliefs. I applaud your compassion, Jan.To categorize as a "false belief", is not only wrong, but potentially, psychologically damaging.
Who brought up the example of somebody knowing something to be false but still maintaining it is true? That would be a mere case of telling lies, wouldn't it, and telling lies is indeed immoral.I don't know why morals has come into it, but if someone maintains that Paris is the capital of Spain, despite knowing that it isn't.
You don't have to be delusional to tell lies. Lies are usually told knowingly; in fact that's kind of the definition of a lie.Then that person is delusional.
No. Knowledge is a more complicated matter than mere belief.It means they don't know. Knowing whether Paris is the capital of France, or Spain, is not about belief. Either you know it or you don't.
Belief only requires that an individual adopts a certain view of things, right or wrong. Knowledge, on the other hand, requires justification and truth. Knowledge requires us to look at the real world, not just at the person holding the view. Belief, on the other hand, is subjective. This is why it is possible to hold a false belief, but not false knowledge.
The example was a good one to uncover exactly where your issues lie in the current discussion.The reality is, the example Sarkus gave was a crap one, and now you feel you have to keep it going.
The fact that you are struggling so with this simple example speaks volumes about you.
How do you possibly hope to be able to discuss God rationally if your level of logical sophistication can't cope with a discussion about belief in the capital of France?
I notice you skipped over the most important part of my post, in terms of the current topic, which is fairly typical of you. Here it is again. I suggest you attempt a response.
James R said:But whether your belief is true or false doesn't just depend on you, it also depends on the facts that are our there in the world. That is, the truth of a belief has an objective as well as a subjective component.
I see this as a big problem with your God belief - that you fail to acknowledge any objective element to it. You seem to think that as long as you honestly believe God Is, or whatever, then your belief can't be false. But in fact, your belief will be false regardless or how fervently you hold it, if there is no God. Whether you have a true God belief or a false God belief doesn't just depend on you, it also depends on the objective reality (or not) of God.
Then you skipped an entire post of mine, in which I examined what you said about having reasons for a belief, how one can hold a false belief despite having a reason and why a reason can't turn a false belief into a true belief. I also discussed mistaken beliefs.
Moving on....
Last edited: