A Game of "Can you be wrong."

[Adamas102]

I don't think I have deeply cherished beliefs like that. Unless the folder contained some sort of incontrovertible proof debunking the laws of physics and reality then I don't think I would find it particularly shocking.

[Deleted]

Leak it to the press. So that we can finally stop discussing semantics about everything and just go with facts.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it's important, semantically, not to freely conflate the concept of belief, with the Fideism concept of faith.

Belief and facts are fundamentally distinct concepts.

Yet somehow they get treated equally when making policy and in discussions.

[May90]

So when expressing the belief that you don't view your other beliefs as right or wrong, is that also a belief you don't know whether it is right or wrong? If so, then what's the point? If not, then that isn't how you view your beliefs.

Also, concerning 'facts' and 'beliefs', ultimately there is no difference. There exists truth, and facts are merely what we believe to be true. We can't really get any closer to the truth than that though. All things we think to be true, all things we believe to be true, are beliefs. Otherwise there would exist many contradictory truths, which wouldn't make sense, since many people claim to know the 'proven truth' or 'facts' even when said truths or facts contradicts another person's known 'proven truths' or 'facts'. Claiming that others are simply wrong in their beliefs then must be taken upon yourself, to realize that the things you hold to be undoubtedly true are in fact doubted by others, and are ultimately beliefs and not necessarily 'truths'. Somebody who doesn't realize this, and claims to know their beliefs are actually truths, is simply being naive and ignorant.

The way I see it, a fact is something that has been logically proven right in a certain model. For example, in Quantum Mechanics that Schroedinger equation holds is a fact, since it logically follows from the mathematically precise theory. Now, whether it holds "in real world" or not is another matter; but models are all we can use to describe the world, and within the given model it is a fact.
Apparently, my knowledge of theories is limited, and sometimes I might think something to be true, which in reality is not. But I would hardly call it a belief, just flawed logic and erroneous knowledge.

A belief is exactly something I do not know to be true, but choose to think it is true nonetheless. The only way such a belief can be "wrong" is if I choose to believe that something is a fact: then, if that fact is somehow proven to be wrong, my belief will be wrong as well. So, what I meant was that I do not hold beliefs of this kind. If I don't know something to be true, then I say that I don't know it to be true. I do not choose to "believe" something to close the gap of ignorance; I prefer to accept my ignorance and, if possible, try to get rid of it. Beliefs I hold are more of a philosophical kind, and those beliefs cannot be right or wrong, they are just the pathways of my thinking.

[Deleted]

Read it probably.. what does it matter?

I dont believe in what I do cause of some ideology, and mine are pretty simple. Everything you want another person to do for you needs consent and if you want something, trade for it. Thats it. There are some shady areas like what to do with people that wont respect your property or freedom or pollute the environment so all will suffer.

I dont have a firm belief about how to get there so I dont even know what that envelope could possibly contain that might change my mind.

[Macaquerie]

I doubt it would really change anything, there are tons of deeply held beliefs that people have that are just demonstrably false. For example, there is overwhelming evidence that the South fought to preserve slavery and little indicating that the war was ever about anything else, yet there are plenty of people who simply reject that reality and substitute their own. I suppose that it is human nature to some extent, being wrong about something you care about is embarrassing and it's often easier to just maintain the delusion than to concede your mistake.

[Independent voter]

You can't destroy faith.

[Zindai]

Probably let certain people who are close to me read it before I go further with the information. But it has to be damn good evidence - just because it was written on a piece of paper doesn't make it true.

[Lylandra]

What I mean is that certain things, such as ethical frameworks, seem to generally or perhaps even always root back into arbitrary values. The values are neither true nor false in their own right and simply have to be accepted or rejected. From those arbitrary values, you can then begin to rationally construct a system that works to promote them.

I agree. You can play this game only with fields of "belief" that can be (hypothetically) rationally disproven. Such as General Relatvity (not a belief, but a very strong theory) or certain economic models or the foundation of the work-force-system (that we all have to work in order to make a living). Or with historical "facts" that turn out to be false. Or with political systems that then fail. One might argue that one could also prove/disprove "god", but I'd say this is only very hypothetically possible (many have tried and many have failed).

For me, it would depend on the case itself. I'd ask myself whether or not the world would/could profit knowing my secret. And how heavy the impact would be. And what would/colud happen in the transition time. Generally speaking, I am totally for spreading "the truth" and if my "belief" was contrary to it, I would have to adapt

[Malagan]

I burn it, of course.


Then I'll spend the rest of my life reassuring myself that I am right regardless of what the folder said, then I'll pick it apart in my mind over and over again to find any way to dismiss its irrefutable proof until I can rest safely knowing my beliefs still hold up.

[spinner981]

The way I see it, a fact is something that has been logically proven right in a certain model. For example, in Quantum Mechanics that Schroedinger equation holds is a fact, since it logically follows from the mathematically precise theory. Now, whether it holds "in real world" or not is another matter; but models are all we can use to describe the world, and within the given model it is a fact.
Apparently, my knowledge of theories is limited, and sometimes I might think something to be true, which in reality is not. But I would hardly call it a belief, just flawed logic and erroneous knowledge.

A belief is exactly something I do not know to be true, but choose to think it is true nonetheless. The only way such a belief can be "wrong" is if I choose to believe that something is a fact: then, if that fact is somehow proven to be wrong, my belief will be wrong as well. So, what I meant was that I do not hold beliefs of this kind. If I don't know something to be true, then I say that I don't know it to be true. I do not choose to "believe" something to close the gap of ignorance; I prefer to accept my ignorance and, if possible, try to get rid of it. Beliefs I hold are more of a philosophical kind, and those beliefs cannot be right or wrong, they are just the pathways of my thinking.

In a certain model? So, as long as you can logically prove (to prove meaning to be convinced that something is true) something given a certain model, that makes it a fact and not a belief? Doesn't that mean that everything, given the proper model, is a fact?

[May90]

In a certain model? So, as long as you can logically prove (to prove meaning to be convinced that something is true) something given a certain model, that makes it a fact and not a belief? Doesn't that mean that everything, given the proper model, is a fact?

Yes. But you have to interpret the fact the right way. Something being true within a model doesn't necessarily make it true in nature. How well does the given model describe our world? Well, it never describes it perfectly, but it can be quite close to it - and that is to be tested by using scientific method.

Belief, of course, also depends on the model. But the nature of it is such that our model does not give us the definitive answer on whether something is true or not, and we make that choice ourselves. I prefer to not do that, choosing instead to accept that I don't know the answer: I may guess what the answer is likely to be, but I won't say that I "believe" in it. What I "believe" in has more to do with how I look at facts than with what I think to be a fact.

[Anonymous1038853]

Facts are objective truths.

Beliefs are interpretations of reality.

Sometimes the two overlap. Sometimes they don't.

[Deleted]

If the folder was of supernatural origin and proved beyond the shadow of a doubt i was wrong suppose i would have to reexamine beliefs. I don't expect it would have been an easy pill to swallow, but the truth is the truth and facts are facts.

[alzoron]

Anyone who's beliefs haven't changed radically at some point is either young and inexperienced, a fool, or a wizard.

[Dezerte]

A unlikely hypothetical but I'd share it. There is no way that I alone would have the time and the knowledge to interpret all the data in the folder.

[ellieg]

People probably still wouldn't believe you. It makes me think about penis pills. Right now, out there in the world, is someone who actually has pills that make your dick longer but no one believes him.

[Ciddy]

I'd probably just count it as bullshit and dismiss it, because it's some random folder that appeared out of nowhere. I have no idea where it came from, who put it together, or how authentic it is. I doubt it would change anything for me.

I would also be investing in some security-related stuff afterwards, because this situation means someone snuck into my house and put a folder on my stomach while I was asleep. That part would freak me out more than anything else.

[Mayhem]

So, there is a game I like to play, it involves your most deeply cherished political beliefs, religious beliefs, deep convictions in general.

You awake tomorrow morning, on your belly is a manila folder whose contents are various documents. Written on the documents is conclusive, objective, incontrovertible proof your deeply held beliefs (Feminism, Nationalism, Anarchist, Libertarian, Property Rights, The South fought for freedom/slavery, Trans-Humanism, the righteousness or evil of the EU for examples) are complete hokum, wrong, bunk, will fail, you are completely and utterly wrong.

You are the sole owner of this folder, all this knowledge exists for just you alone so far.

What do you do with this dark revelation?

What if my strongest held belief is that information should be spread to educate as many as possible?

- - - Updated - - -

I'd be more concerned with who left the envelope, and why they gave it to me.

Because you´re awesome, beautiful and a great actress!

[unbound]

So, there is a game I like to play, it involves your most deeply cherished political beliefs, religious beliefs, deep convictions in general.

You awake tomorrow morning, on your belly is a manila folder whose contents are various documents. Written on the documents is conclusive, objective, incontrovertible proof your deeply held beliefs (Feminism, Nationalism, Anarchist, Libertarian, Property Rights, The South fought for freedom/slavery, Trans-Humanism, the righteousness or evil of the EU for examples) are complete hokum, wrong, bunk, will fail, you are completely and utterly wrong.

You are the sole owner of this folder, all this knowledge exists for just you alone so far.

What do you do with this dark revelation?

Not entirely sure how to answer this question. Obviously, no such folder can exist in the real world (it would take a large library to contain such information; and many questions don't have such simple black-and-white answers), but I assume I'm supposed to behave as if this could happen in the real world...

Most likely, it will just be information that can be made available for others. It will not change many people's minds. For those who may actually be open enough to have their minds changed, it doesn't address the primary problem that many subjects (e.g. feminism, nationalism, EU) don't have a simple answer. The information would be good, but there are a lot of complexities involved with the real world we exist in...and there are rarely single answers that satisfy everyone involved; hence, in a functioning political environment, there are a lot of compromises. Very few should get their way completely, but everyone should get a little of something that we can all live with.

For areas that are more objective (e.g. the South actually fought to maintain slavery), we already have incontrovertible proof, but you will notice that people still argue against those facts. And, in reality, there were probably a sizable number of foot soldiers that truly thought they were fighting for noble reasons regardless of the fact that the leadership was fighting to preserve slavery (very similar to many religions today where the followers ignore the reality of what their leadership actually does).

[ItachiZaku]

I'd shrug off most of it, cuz I just don't really care. For religion, i'd... too far fucked to redeem myself now. I guess i'd just go about my day as normal.