• Banno
    2.7k
    It adds no further meaning to belief statements.creativesoul

    That's wrong. Some beliefs can be true, some false; therefore something is added to a belief in its being true.

    I don't see that there is anything here that has not been already covered.
  • creativesoul
    2.5k
    That's wrong. Some beliefs can be true, some false; therefore something is added to a belief in its being true.Banno

    Rubbish.

    Belief can be both true and false. Adding "is true" onto a belief statement does not change the meaning of the belief statement.

    All belief presupposes it's own truth.
  • creativesoul
    2.5k
    I don't see that there is anything here that has not been already covered.Banno

    Try this...

    Well. We're looking for what counts as belief; a criterion of necessary and sufficient conditions which when met by a candidate warrants our calling that candidate "belief". Belief must be meaningful, and it must presuppose truth. Those are necessary because if we remove either, what's left cannot count as belief.

    So... all correlation is belief because all correlation attributes meaning(by virtue of drawing correlations) as well as presupposes the existence of it's own content(regardless of subsequent further qualification). Statements presuppose truth. Belief prior to language presupposes truth in the aforementioned manner(all correlation presupposes the existence of it's own content).
    creativesoul
  • Sapientia
    5.5k
    Let's get back on track. If the keys are in the kitchen, we say "the keys are in the kitchen" or, perhaps even "it is true that the keys are in the kitchen" in order to really push the point.

    We sometimes use talk of belief to distinguish what is true from what is false - I searched the kitchen because I believed the keys were there, but as it turns out I was wrong.

    Compare:
    Pat searched the kitchen because he believed that his keys were there.

    with
    Pat searched the kitchen because there was a good chance his keys were there.

    The notion of belief is used to bring out the difference between the keys being in the kitchen and one's thinking that the keys are in the kitchen - between being true and being acknowledged or accepted as true.

    Now I take that to be the very common sense explanation you seem to think I deny.
    Banno

    Yes, let's. To get back on track, I think we'll have to retrace the track a little.

    The notion I am playing with is that we get the order of the explanation wrong.

    It's not:
    Pat believes the keys are in the Kitchen
    So, all things being equal, Pat will search in the kitchen

    but

    Pat searched in the kitchen
    Therefore Pat says he believes the keys are in the kitchen
    Banno

    Probability?

    I don't think so. I think we are using belief here simply to mark the fact that the keys might not be in the kitchen.
    Banno

    You denied the common sense order of explanation, you denied that it has to do with probability, and you put forward an inferior alternative. That's a mistake. The right answer is that Pat believed that there was a good chance that his keys were in the kitchen, so he searched the kitchen. Your alternative leaves open the question of why Pat searched the kitchen - which is why I asked you that question, but for some reason you chose not to answer. If what Pat says is true, then you're back to the common sense order of explanation, but with a redundant addition of what Pat says. What Pat says doesn't matter. What Pat believed matters.

    Contrary to what you said, we're not using belief here simply to mark the fact that the keys might not be in the kitchen. That's your less plausible alternative. It's wrong. We're using belief to explain Pat's behaviour. That makes a lot more sense. It's obvious, isn't it? Why skip past the obvious answer?
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment