A distressing thought: is reason a valid tool with which to evaluate beliefs? I doubt that any argument could be made to the effect that reason is such a tool, without begging the question.
1) Do you think that your beliefs (or anyone's beliefs) that are being evaluated should have a rational basis? For example, if I believed that the moon was made of green cheese, there could be a rational way to refute that.
2) If you want to evaluate beliefs, what tool other than reason were you planning on using? It may not be perfect, but there aren't a lot of options that I can think of offhand, other than empirical proof.
Honestly, I get tired of people who claim their right to believe idiotic things because "that's just what I believe" or "it's my opinion". The truth is beliefs are not devoid of truth values, and can therefore be evaluated.
Hope you don't mind my commenting. I just miss talking phil with people. =] --Em
I don't understand response 1. Maybe this is related, maybe not: I invite you to give a rational argument to the effect that the moon is not made of green cheese and I will attempt to show where you have begged the question
( ... )
I think what I mean is that reason is a tool for evaluating belief if you happen to think that belief should be rational. A belief in (a) god is not inherently rational because there is no concrete proof of god, so reason cannot be used to evaluate that sort of belief
( ... )
Ok, now we have an example of reason being used as a tool to evaluate a belief (i.e. the belief that the moon is not made of green cheese). I asked for the argument because I think it will be easier to discuss this with a concrete example in mind. The problem is that there has been no justification for why reason is to be trusted. Your argument sounds good if I accept the rules of logic, but why should I accept those rules? I am having trouble answering this question without using logic itself: and to prove that logic is acceptable by using logic begs the question
( ... )
Well, I'm not as highly educated as the rest of those who are commenting and my vocabulary is minute in comparison compared to those who have commented before me and will clearly comment after me. And with that, I have chosen to leave my humble opinion before you
( ... )
I am somewhat peeved by the last sentence of your comment, as I have memories of unpleasant conflicts arising from uncalled for arguments made by myself against you. But that was a over a year and a half ago, I hope I've matured somewhat since then. I think intend this paragraph to be a sincere, but vague, apology.
Let me attempt to disambiguate what I said. The first two denotations you have posted are close to what I meant. The third one is not what I meant, and the last one is only relevant in that religious tenets fall under the category of what I meant by "belief," but the last one is not the definition of belief that I intended. By belief I am referring to my relation to certain statements. As in, there are certain statements whose truth I assent to. The question is, are these statements whose truth I assent to actually true? To determine if a belief is correct means to determine if I really should trust the truth of a certain statement. Take for example the belief that the moon is not made of green cheese. To evaluate this
( ... )
I don't hold any grudge or hard feeling toward you due to my experiences in Madison. If anything, those arguments taught me that life, seriously, is not fair and that there are people who will want to hurt me, and I must decide whether or not I'll allow it. I'm glad that you've grown, and I know I have as well. I've developed a thicker skin and sadly enough, a harder heart.
And in my final statement about the bloodbath, I assumed that my vocabulary and my non-academic background would make it impossible for me to make a clear concise statement that would cause any thought.
Personally, I trust instinct. Reason is great and I use it daily to make basic decisions and inferences, but I rely on instinct and feeling rather than logic. Many situations have taught me to trust my gut as opposed to what "should" or "should not" be based on normal standards.
Comments 18
1) Do you think that your beliefs (or anyone's beliefs) that are being evaluated should have a rational basis? For example, if I believed that the moon was made of green cheese, there could be a rational way to refute that.
2) If you want to evaluate beliefs, what tool other than reason were you planning on using? It may not be perfect, but there aren't a lot of options that I can think of offhand, other than empirical proof.
Honestly, I get tired of people who claim their right to believe idiotic things because "that's just what I believe" or "it's my opinion". The truth is beliefs are not devoid of truth values, and can therefore be evaluated.
Hope you don't mind my commenting. I just miss talking phil with people. =]
--Em
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Let me attempt to disambiguate what I said. The first two denotations you have posted are close to what I meant. The third one is not what I meant, and the last one is only relevant in that religious tenets fall under the category of what I meant by "belief," but the last one is not the definition of belief that I intended. By belief I am referring to my relation to certain statements. As in, there are certain statements whose truth I assent to. The question is, are these statements whose truth I assent to actually true? To determine if a belief is correct means to determine if I really should trust the truth of a certain statement. Take for example the belief that the moon is not made of green cheese. To evaluate this ( ... )
Reply
And in my final statement about the bloodbath, I assumed that my vocabulary and my non-academic background would make it impossible for me to make a clear concise statement that would cause any thought.
Personally, I trust instinct. Reason is great and I use it daily to make basic decisions and inferences, but I rely on instinct and feeling rather than logic. Many situations have taught me to trust my gut as opposed to what "should" or "should not" be based on normal standards.
Is that a satisfactory response?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment