Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada
"Are you saying I did borrow the bicycle then ... even though I didn't? "
No, I'm saying that Sam's belief is true despite the fact that you borrowed something else than what he beleived.
It was true for the truth and facts of what the belief itself had, what he truly believed, and knew was a true possibility, not "false" for not correlating to a fact he couldn't know to begin with: what you actually borrowed.
Presence in the belief:
The truth of believing
The truth of a possibility.
The strength of both.
The knowledge of exactly what you borrowed.
It is the presence of its own truth and strength in the belief in something itself, that makes the belief true. That is both the truth and strength, and the true possibility believed in, make the belief true. Whatever was absent from the belief does not define the belief itself. There is no way that Sam could believe in what he didn't have: the knowledge of what actually was borrowed, even if he guessed the same thing that was . It would still be the same thing, in the act of believing: a belief in a true possibility based on his best judgement, and knowledge of other things and strengthened by believing.
There is no way he could know that his belief were incongruent with what actually was borrowed. And if he could know that his belief were thus, that would essentially take away the believing and replace it with certain knowledge, and therefore in no way believe in the possibility, that the bike was borrowed, instead of the actual fact that the truck was borrowed. But the actual fact was not part of his act. Therefore it does not make his believe false. He didn't believe in any wrongness or falseness. But he simply believed in a possibility, that is something all beliefs do. To me the incongruency of the belief with the fact of what you did, doesn't make the actuality of his belief false or wrong anymore than the incongruency with Sam's belief makes the actuality of what you did false or wrong.
"Then we have a different definition of "true". You are making up your own. What I mean by "true" is whether or not Sam's belief correlates with external facts."
I already mentioned in the "Belief and Science" thread that when I say "true" I do mean "actual" My reasons are posted in that thread Stephanos, and also mentioned above too. The external facts simply don't "incriminate" or prove that the belief itself is wrong or false. One can't believe in something he or she doesn't know about, such as a incongruity with facts. The incongruity of facts is simply an incongruity of facts, not a falseness or wrongness that is believed in or defines the belief.
"If a statement is soley about something external, why do you say that nothing external determines it's truth?
But when you are speaking about someone's belief Stephanos, you are no longer talking about an impersonal statement or phrase or description, nor something external, but instead something that is always internal, spiritual, and personal. Instead of saying "this or that is wrong" or "this or that is false" You say "your belief is "wrong"
You are blaming the innocent act of believing in something as being the wrong.
Instead of a wrong that is not believed in.
It is basically the same as saying "you believe in wrongness"
It is like saying someone that believes in someone because that person shows respect today, has belief that is wrong or false or in the evil itself, if that person believed in shows disrespect and is harmful tomorrow. Or if one can't see an ice patch under the snow, so trusts there is soft snow as he stepped in so far, that if there is an icepatch his belief is false.
I don't believe that people believe in anything false or wrong. But that doesn't mean people don't fall among wrongs, despite the true and good beliefs they have. That's what happend with Adam and Eve in the bible, that's what happens to them today as well. Adam and Eve don't believe in wrongness. But that doesn't mean they don't fall into it.
"But volition and sincerity, are separate issues. "
I can't agree with that at all. Volition and sincerity are two most important truths of every belief. As truths therefore they define the belief as true.
What is aloof and not even known by the belief, however, is the actually fact of what happened. Therefore how, does that fact, determine the belief at all?
"I'll ask you again Essorant. Why don't you believe someone can be sincerely wrong? You wouldn't be so accomodating to a Taxi driver's opinion that you wanted to go south, when you really wanted to go north would you? I'm sure you would turn him around, however politely. Your philosophy doesn't work in real life."
I am not willing to call randomness belief, Stephanos. If you pick something out randomly, you are not picking it out by belief, but picking out by chance. Therefore saying "north" "south" etc, has no substance to me. It is just a random guess, not a belief. Even if you say a random guess may be a belief, it doesn't stand for sincere or strong one.
"So back to that bicycle that I never borrowed ... Is sam right, regardless of the facts?"
Sam is not right or wrong. He is human.
The belief is not right or wrong. It is true.
What about the facts though?
Sam believed that you borrowed something else than what you did. That is a difference that includes no wrongness or falseness. A belief can't be blamed for not being the same as a fact, or a certain knowledge of fact, because if it were the same I don't think it would even be a belief anymore.
[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-19-2006 04:36 PM).]