OK so here's another argument - fact vs beliefs

[jajdude]

Fact vs Beliefs

Man, I am bored.

Do we know one from the other?

We like to think so right? But it all gets tired. It gets muddled. Now, if we really knew, why have lives been eaten up over this? I have no idea.

I've only thought about this recently, like for a day or so.

Hey, got any grapes? ("duck song"on youtube, funny)

yeah I been drinking the juice.

[Armel P]

You may be interested in looking into "model dependent realism."

[Dodo25]

You may be interested in looking into "model dependent realism."

Excellent, I second that.

(And if you're philosophically inclined, read Quine's 'The Two Dogmas of Empiricism', but that one is harder to understand and basically makes the same claim.)

[Armel P]

Excellent, I second that.

(And if you're philosophically inclined, read Quine's 'The Two Dogmas of Empiricism', but that one is harder to understand and basically makes the same claim.)

Inclined is appropriate. It's a rather gradual incline. I never really studied or read much philosophy. But I read it when it specifically discusses questions that plague me or topics that fascinate me. (I don't mind attempting somewhat difficult philosophy but I find it problematic to read writings that assume a historical knowledge of previously written ideas.) I looked it up Quine's paper just now and it seems like great stuff. I'll check it out. Thank you for the recommendation.

[Cunninglinguist]

According to current philosophy this is not really a proper dichotomy - you must believe in facts (since knowledge requires belief, according to JTB). You also believe in opinions, which may or may not correspond to reality. But since you have no way of knowing if your beliefs are true, you can never say with any certainty that you "know" an opinion.

Then how do we know a fact from an opinion? I would argue that the former comes out of a deduction, the latter an induction. A deduction starts with a premise and only concludes that which necessarily follows from the premise, and so, given that the premise is true, the conclusion must be true. To state that all bachelors are unmarried is a fact, since unmarried is a necessary condition to being a bachelor; to state that where there is a hill there is a valley (to use one of Hume's examples) is a fact; 1 + 1 = 2 is a fact; that there cannot be a simultaneously green, red, cubical, and spherical tomato is a fact. Our "best" inductions (our best educated guesses) seem to make the least number of unintuitive assumptions about the world (they follow something like Occam's Razor). To say that there is a floor under me is a fairly sound induction, since it would be unintuitive to assume that the floor is actually an illusion. But since people's assumptions vary on a personal basis we expect there to be controversy over the merits of an induction.

One has to be wary, though, of deductions from premises based on inductions. While the conclusions may be facts with that given premise, since the premise is not ultimately necessary but only probable, so too the conclusion becomes.

[Delta40]

lol. According to my brother he deals only with facts and truth while I must rely on opinion to guide me!

[The Atheist]

Fact vs Beliefs

Man, I am bored.

Do we know one from the other?

Facts are supported by evidence, beliefs are not. If they were, they'd be facts.

[JBI]

Facts are supported by evidence, beliefs are not. If they were, they'd be facts.

Well, you make it to black a white:

"We believe the suspect to be a male between the ages of 17 or 18, and carrying a gun."

The evidence, he shot someone and we have a picture, why is it a belief, because it has not been "confirmed" as fact, something which is far more difficult. We cannot say for sure he is that age, but there is evidence pointing to it.

[Armel P]

I smell a semantical argument brewing.

[Cunninglinguist]

lol. According to my brother he deals only with facts and truth while I must rely on opinion to guide me!

He sounds like quite the opinionated fellow.

[The Atheist]

Well, you make it to black a white:

"We believe the suspect to be a male between the ages of 17 or 18, and carrying a gun."

The evidence, he shot someone and we have a picture, why is it a belief, because it has not been "confirmed" as fact, something which is far more difficult. We cannot say for sure he is that age, but there is evidence pointing to it.

I smell a semantical argument brewing.

Quite possibly, but I don't think we need to go there just yet.

The belief in the example is only a supposition. It may be based on eyewitness evidence, or even cameras, but since images don't reveal age beyond a guesstimate and gender beyond stereotypes, I think it actually highlights the difference between a belief and a fact quite nicely.

If the suspect had been pulled over by a cop and had his licence and gun sighted, it would be more reasonable to presume the bulletin would be" The suspect is a white male aged 17 and carrying a Colt .45."