Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cylixd.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!ucdavis!ucbvax!decvax!bellcore!petrus!magic!nvc!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!akgub!cylixd!charli From: charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: Consistency Message-ID: <443@cylixd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 6-Nov-85 10:16:53 EST Article-I.D.: cylixd.443 Posted: Wed Nov 6 10:16:53 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Nov-85 05:30:23 EST References: <2449@sjuvax.UUCP> <546@ihwpt.UUCP> Reply-To: charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips) Distribution: net Organization: RCA Cylix Communications , Memphis, TN Lines: 24 >Saying that >something is a "belief" ALSO acknowledges that you do not KNOW that >it is true and that you suspect that it, in fact, may not be true; >otherwise, I contend that you would say that you KNOW that it is >true. (e.g. I KNOW that I am typing this message; I BELIEVE that >you will comprehend its meaning). >The interesting question is: WHY do people "hold that belief to be >true", given that they do not know that it is actually true? >. . . . >Facts are statements which are >consistent with reality; any other statement is simply non-factual >and false. [Richard S. Latimer] Fact: I love my husband. Belief: My husband loves me. I hold this belief to be true. I do not (indeed, I *cannot*) KNOW that it is true, I simply BELIEVE that it is. I have no proof that he does, in fact, love me; he may be dissembling. My statement about my husband's love for me is obviously a statement of belief, and therefore non-factual. This does not make it false. Now, Mr. Latimer, do you now "WHY...people 'hold that belief to be true', given that they do not know that it is actually true?" charli