Do beliefs matter?

[Rowan]

I was thinking on this the other day. The answer in my mind is already a dominant "yes". My reasoning is that beliefs inform our actions and the actions we take are almost certainly important. The reason I pose this question to all of you, is because I learned that not many people actually care whether or not their beliefs are true. They are comfortable believing what makes them happy, as opposed to what is likely to be true. To those people I ask, why dont you think beliefs matter? Do beliefs only matter to an extent? Explain. This debate can range from many things, not just religious belief. Please give examples and be as descriptive as possible.

[Lacquer Head]

Beliefs matter to the individual, but that's where they stop. Uninformed, self based moral systems are what have caused the vast majority of infighting in humans as a species. People think their opinions and beliefs are more important than another persons. Now, I try to respect another person opinions, as far as not judging them or anything, but as soon as they start trying to push their beliefs on me, they lose all respect I had in them. It really depends on the believe, but usually the only thing acting on your morals gets is personal satisfaction, it's the epitome of selfishness.

Personally, I have my own views of what's right or wrong, but I only hold myself to the code on conduct. I wont judge another person until they try to hold their opinion over another person or try to take their rights to express their opinion away from them. I think we should be able to say whatever we want without persecution. No one should be attacked for expressing their own opinion. People that get "offended" about such things are just purely selfish.

[Heartless Angel]

Depends on what you mean by "matter". If you're talking in an objective universal sense, not really, people are utterly insignificant, what they think, do, or say doesn't have any real far reaching consequences that amount to anything in the long run. If you're talking in terms of the life of a individual, absolutely beliefs matter. As you and I established in our debates way back when, our entire structure of knowledge and ideas is based upon a single fundamental uncertain idea, that can only be considered an unsupported and unsupportable belief, never a certain fact. That belief is the ultimate motivating factor in everything we ever think, do, or aspire to do. Without our fundamental beliefs, correct or incorrect, we could never begin to try to know or understand anything else. Without the fundamental beliefs that build the framework for our webs of beliefs, we couldn't function. We as humans, in our unfortunate limited form of existence, can never truly know anything, beliefs are all we can ever really have. As for why some people are less concerned with finding certainty in the truth of their beliefs, there could be numerous reasons. In the case of religious beliefs, for example, that the individual would no longer care to function if they were truly without purpose, without meaning, and destined to fade into obscurity without making any significant impact in this reality or having anything to show for it afterwards. A guy like me doesn't really care one way or another, so I'm fine being agnostic and accepting no beliefs as truth, someone else might not be able to function in a world where they thought of themselves as insignificant and temporary like I do. On the reverse side, some would be equally incapable of accepting that we can't ever know anything and all our progress being for nothing in the end, and cling to more scientific beliefs and the belief that through science the world can be understood and improved by an individual, even in the absence of certainty.

[Lacquer Head]

I agree and disagree with that to an extent. I believe a person can look at things objectively if they truly try hard enough, and are aware enough of their own biases(I'd say COMPLETE lack of bias is impossible, still). Though, that becomes a belief in its own right I guess... If anything, I absolutely try to view things from an unbiased and objective view point.

[Heartless Angel]

I myself ultimately believe that true knowledge is unobtainable, logic itself becomes a logical contradiction if you go back far enough into a system of beliefs, and is no more certain than any other reason people have for believing the things they do. the only way I could ever be totally unbiased, and not relying on my own fundamentally uncertain beliefs about the nature of logic and its applications to the properties of truth, would be to stop thinking altogether. I can't view reality at all without that fundamental filter of bias I require to function. In that regard, logic itself can be considered a bias, so when it comes to trying to be objective, through the attempt alone we show bias. I accept logic as the only reliable tool for understanding reality, but in doing so, must allow myself to accept a fundamental belief without any true knowledge. If however, I did not accept logic or some alternative fundamental belief as such, I couldn't think about reality in the first place. Logic however has the ability to identify this flaw within itself, so through logic, at least one can become aware of the paradox. I consider that an accomplishment in itself, which makes me feel as though I'm on the right track with my fundamental beliefs. Of course that too is unprovable.

[Lacquer Head]

Hmm, I see what you're saying, because even the most logical answer isn't always the correct answer and so on. I was going to make this post longer, but I ended up just thinking out loud and such >_> so <3s for making me feel like thinking tonight.

[Heartless Angel]

I was thinking more along the lines of, we can't be certain our perceptions of reality reflect the truth in the first place, all that we know is ultimately based on assumptions that we are aware of reality in its true form, but we can't really be certain of that. But yes, there are less philosophical, more general scenarios in which logical thinking can arrive at the wrong conclusion.

And you're welcome, I do that to people.

[Rowan]

HA, you are wayy too hung up on absolute certainty. Why would you view knowledge that way? You cant be absolutely certain that im not sitting on an invisible penguin that shits out invisible fairy floss that has the power to make the weather change. Its always about whats likely to be true, which is how you come to your conclusions, i assume. Its ironic. You're absolutley certain that you cant be absolutley certain.

the foundations for a logical belief in my opinion, revolve around whats likely to be true and we are able to test these with methods that are proven to be reliable because they can be repeated with the same successful results with various different methods that all lead to the same answer.

Could you care to explain the correlation between knowledge and absolute certainty in the sense that you believe that we cant know anything?

edit: and excuse me if I've misinterpreted anything you've said.

[Heartless Angel]

HA, you are wayy too hung up on absolute certainty. Why would you view knowledge that way? You cant be absolutely certain that im not sitting on an invisible penguin that shits out invisible fairy floss that has the power to make the weather change. Its always about whats likely to be true, which is how you come to your conclusions, i assume. Its ironic. You're absolutley certain that you cant be absolutley certain.

Because logic dictates that it is the truth. I'm not certain of anything, I don't try to be, because I know I can't be. That's why beliefs matter, since we can't have absolute certainty, we have to have our fundamental beliefs to establish any logical structure of ideas. For me, that fundamental belief upon which all my ideas rely is logic. Logic tells me I can't be certain that you aren't the aforementioned weather changing fairy floss shitting penguin sitting person you might be, but at the same time, logic tells me that it is most likely that you aren't. My fundamental beliefs about logic matter in the grand scheme of my life, my belief about the existence of weather changing fairy floss shitting penguins doesn't. Because my stance on the magic penguins doesn't matter, I don't spend too much energy thinking about it. The beliefs that define who I am as a person, those I consider to be somewhat important, so them, I put a good deal of energy into thinking about, which led me to the paradoxic nature of logic. I'm definitely interested in whether that is true, because i can't logically determine whether it's more likely than not without violating a basic principle of logic. The beliefs that matter, I have a desire for certainty with, the beliefs that rely upon it, I'm willing to settle for inductive reasoning on, because they themselves aren't all that important. If the ideas i have based on inductive reasoning aren't true because my fundamental belief is not true, I've got bigger things to worry about than whether or not you're sitting on a ****ing penguin.

the foundations for a logical belief in my opinion, revolve around whats likely to be true and we are able to test these with methods that are proven to be reliable because they can be repeated with the same successful results with various different methods that all lead to the same answer.

Consistency does not ensure truth. Before telescopes or astronomy one could reliably look up to the night sky, and the universe would reliably seem to revolve around the earth. It still does. However the universe does not revolve around the earth. What matters isn't knowledge of the consistency of an observation, but knowledge of the validity of an observation. We explain things with observations all the time, and often we're not right. Before the force of gravity was discovered, people probably had a different explanation for why apples fell. There was probably some debate about whether the idea of gravity was more valid than the previous explanation, but here's the thing, apples weren't floating pending the outcome of these debates. The truth is true whether or not we're aware of it. The truth is consistent, so we often observe things consistently, but that doesn't meant we're observing all relevant data and seeing the whole truth. I'm interested in seeing the whole truth. I'm not satisfied just agreeing that apples don't float in the air, I need to understand the force of gravity. Just as I don't particularly care what numbers correspond to what observations, I'm more interested in the underlying principles that determine WHY. I'm just not a pragmatic person. I'm a theoretical, analytical thinker, not an engineer. I'm far more interested in understanding my universe than knowing how to manipulate it to serve my purposes, as such, a different set of beliefs "matter" in the context of my life than a more pragmatic thinker trying to find a specific solution. For him, the belief that matters is what goes on the other sides of the equals sign, for me what beliefs matter are the rules of solving the equation. Which beliefs matter, and which then are more important to try to be sure of (and really what being sure even MEANS) depends on the person, and what they intend to do with a belief.

Could you care to explain the correlation between knowledge and absolute certainty in the sense that you believe that we cant know anything?

I generally identify knowledge and absolue certainty as one in the same, I tend to use the word belief for anything lacking in certainty. Certainty is unobtainable, therefore using the words as I do, knowledge is unobtainable. I think of it like building a building. If I have a plot purchased, I don't have a foundation laid, so I can't start building the actual building yet. I have a theoretical foundation to begin planning my building to fit, but a theoretical building is all I can have as long as I only have a theoretical foundation. If the fundamental belief upon which all my other beliefs rely is uncertain, so then are all my other beliefs. If I can't have a certain foundation, I can't have a certain building That they aren't certain doesn't mean I don't bother to think about my other non fundamental beliefs by any means, there are definitely times and places for pragmatism, they're just few and far between in my life, because I'm far more interested in absolute certainty.

[Rowan]

I generally identify knowledge and absolue certainty as one in the same, I tend to use the word belief for anything lacking in certainty. Certainty is unobtainable, therefore using the words as I do, knowledge is unobtainable. I think of it like building a building. If I have a plot purchased, I don't have a foundation laid, so I can't start building the actual building yet. I have a theoretical foundation to begin planning my building to fit, but a theoretical building is all I can have as long as I only have a theoretical foundation. If the fundamental belief upon which all my other beliefs rely is uncertain, so then are all my other beliefs. If I can't have a certain foundation, I can't have a certain building That they aren't certain doesn't mean I don't bother to think about my other non fundamental beliefs by any means, there are definitely times and places for pragmatism, they're just few and far between in my life, because I'm far more interested in absolute certainty.

You recognize absolute certainty doesnt exist, yet you are interested in it. The way you view knowledge as being absolute certainty i dont tend to agree with; Ill use your example.
If your beliefs allowed you lay the foundations for theoertical building, the building became a success and was everything you expected as a success, wouldn't the end result mean you have aquired the knowledge that your original belifs were correct? If everything has worked out the way you had planned, even though you were uncertain, the end result being a success would mean that you could be certain that those views were likely to be correct in the first place? Why are you interested in absolute certainty? Do you think that kind of knowledge is useful?

[Lacquer Head]

Absolute certainy DOES exist, we just can't obtain it, but it's still interesting to further your knowledge as much as possible, to improve your accuracy. Logic isn't perfect, but it's a lot more reliable than blind gut instinct.

[Rowan]

Absolute certainy DOES exist, we just can't obtain it

How can you acknowledge it exists and not be able to attain it?

[Lacquer Head]

Because the only way to be sure is after it happens, which is too late for us to know. As soon as we develop some hot sexy time travel action, absolute certainty will become available.

[Rowan]

Still you're talking about absolute certainty. It's useless knowledge. What's wrong with referencing knowledge with likelihood? The foundation of any rational belief.

[Lacquer Head]

How would the ability to always make the proper decisions be useless? o.O Likelihood is never certain, and risks can easily outweigh likelihood. With absolute certainty, you more or less lose risks. For example, I wouldn't sit down for a game of russian roulette with 6 people and who ever doesn't die gets like $15,000 or something. Though, if I knew for a fact I wouldn't die, damn right I'd sit down.

[Rowan]

But you can never be absolutely certain, you never need to be. Likelihood is good enough. If you have 99999 black coins in a bag and 1 red coin, likelihood tells us that you will pick up a black coin. Why the hell would you need to be absolutey certain of that?

[Lacquer Head]

Well in that situation, I wouldn't need absolute certainty. But when the odds AREN'T so vastly uneven...I'm a fairly paranoid person, if that explains anything.

HOW THE HELL DID WE EVEN GET THIS DERAILED!?

[Heartless Angel]

You recognize absolute certainty doesnt exist, yet you are interested in it. The way you view knowledge as being absolute certainty i dont tend to agree with; Ill use your example.
If your beliefs allowed you lay the foundations for theoertical building, the building became a success and was everything you expected as a success, wouldn't the end result mean you have aquired the knowledge that your original belifs were correct? If everything has worked out the way you had planned, even though you were uncertain, the end result being a success would mean that you could be certain that those views were likely to be correct in the first place? Why are you interested in absolute certainty? Do you think that kind of knowledge is useful?

The building CAN'T become a success until it is built, it can't be built until a real foundation is laid. That's what I'm getting at. My web of beliefs isn't a 'success' in any way I care about until it ceases to be a web of beliefs, and becomes a set of absolute truths by being built logically upon a certainty instead of an unsupported belief. The only logic that can be built upon observation of results is inductive. Induction doesn't establish truth, it compares probabilities of truth. Probability is enough for pragmatic things, but I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in certainty, because I'm an ultra intuitive rational personality type. Means my brain constantly generates a billion possibilities, and by now I've come up with many that are logically possible that contradict my entire understanding of reality. There is no relevant evidence to go on with induction to determine the likelihood, and certainly no proof of the certainty of any these thoughts I have. Usefulness only matters in the world of a pragmatist. Whether or not an idea works or is useful matters little to me, I simply seek to know and understand the truth.

[Rowan]

I dont think beliefs require absolute certainty to be valid, thats the point im making. But I do think that beliefs need to be rationalized, justified and have evidence to support the likelyhood that they are to be true and not false. With those 3 things considered, how important is absolute certainty? I will go back to my previous statement of having 9999 black coins and 1 red coin in a bag, lacquer head said that is a situation in which absolute certainty wouldn't be required to make the correct decision, as we have the knowledge that the likelyhood of you picking up a black coin is 9999 to 1. The method I just used to determine the factor is mathimatical and my point in case. We have so many tools that determine likeness of that kind of caliber for many different things, so i dont really care about absolute certainty because I have something that is so close to being a certainty, that, that fraction of a percent that its lacking, doesnt affect me in my beliefs or decisions. Although I can understand having absolute certainty about the origins of the universe and the ideas of god, although I tend to just be happy with what I've learned and I trust my own judgements based on the evidence that ive been shown and im happy to furthar let those methods of calculation determine for me what is likely to be true. In the end, I believe those things could lead to absolute certainty, they definitely arnt leading to uncertainty.