Belief and Certainty

Certainty series
Nihilism Agnosticism Uncertainty Justification Probability Estimation Belief Certainty Determinism

Belief is the state of mind in which an individual is convinced of the truth or validity of a proposition or premise (argument) without adequately proving or attempting to prove their main contention. Certainty is the state of mind in which an individual is convinced of the validity, truthfulness, or evidence of a proposition or premise. While believing is possible without warrant or evidence, certainty implies having valid evidence or proof.

There is a degree of belief and certainty. While faith often includes commitment and it is used in religious contexts, belief is a general concept. People almost always have certain beliefs with or without realizing them, which include the continual and consistent existence of the world and the principles of existence, identity of people around one, some trustworthiness of social practices, and others. Edmund Husserl argued that the belief (Husserl called the fundamental belief "ur-doxa") underlies one's framework of thinking and it exists at the deeper level of consciousness without realizing what it is. Some philosophers consciously cased doubt on whatever is dubitable in order to find the secure point of departure in philosophy. A well known example is Descaertes' methodic doubt.

Belief and awareness

There is a degree of awareness of what one believes. Some beliefs come to the foreground of thought and one is fully aware of the fact that one believes in certain matters. Some beliefs, however, goes to the background of thought and constitute the framework of thinking. One simply believes in them without realizing having those beliefs.

Philosophy is, in certain sense, a series of attempt to disclose unjustified or unsound beliefs his or her predecessors held without realizing what they were. New approach of philosophy emerges when unrealized presuppositions were brought into the foreground and so called the paradigm was changed. The radical paradigm shift often involves examination and realization of what predecessors took it for granted.

In religious practices such as Zen, practitioners are asked to reflect upon oneself to realize what one blindly believed in. Zen teachings shed light on what one blindly believed in and tells that those beliefs are unsound cause of worry and sufferings. Zen's teaching of "non-thinking" or suspension of thinking is an attempt to allow the practitioner to realize unsoundness of his or her blind beliefs and see one's outlook from the perspective of Buddhism.

Belief as a psychological theory

Mainstream psychology and related disciplines have traditionally treated belief as if it were the simplest form of mental representation and therefore one of the building blocks of conscious thought. Philosophers have tended to be more rigorous in their analysis and much of the work examining the viability of the belief concept stems from philosophical analysis.

The concept of belief presumes a subject (the believer) and an object of belief (the proposition) so like other propositional attitudes, belief implies the existence of mental states and intentionality, both of which are hotly debated topics in the philosophy of mind and whose foundations and relation to brain states are still controversial.

Beliefs are sometimes divided into core beliefs (those which you may be actively thinking about) and dispositional beliefs (those which you may ascribe to but have never previously thought about). For example, if asked 'do you believe tigers wear pink pajamas ?' a person might answer that they do not, despite the fact they may never have thought about this situation before.

The idea that a belief is a mental state is much more contentious. While some philosophers have argued that beliefs are represented in the mind as sentence-like constructs others have gone as far as arguing that there is no consistent or coherent mental representation that underlies our common use of the belief concept and is therefore obsolete and should be rejected.

This has important implications for understanding the neuropsychology and neuroscience of belief. If the concept of belief is incoherent or ultimately indefensible then any attempt to find the underlying neural processes which support it will fail. If the concept of belief does turn out to be useful then this goal should (in principle) be achievable.

Philosopher Lynne Rudder Baker has outlined four main contemporary approaches to belief in her book Saving Belief:

• Our common-sense understanding of belief is correct - Sometimes called the ‘mental sentence theory’, in this conception, beliefs exist as coherent entities and the way we talk about them in everyday life is a valid basis for scientific endeavor. Jerry Fodor is one of the principal defenders of this point of view.
• Our common-sense understanding of belief may not be entirely correct, but it is close enough to make some useful predictions - This view argues that we will eventually reject the idea of belief as we use it now, but that there may be a correlation between what we take to be a belief when someone says 'I believe that snow is white' and however a future theory of psychology will explain this behavior. Most notably philosopher Stephen Stich has argued for this particular understanding of belief.
• Our common-sense understanding of belief is entirely wrong and will be completely superseded by a radically different theory which will have no use for the concept of belief as we know it - Known as eliminativism, this view, (most notably proposed by Paul and Patricia Churchland), argues that the concept of belief is like obsolete theories of times past such as the four humours theory of medicine, or the phlogiston theory of combustion. In these cases science hasn’t provided us with a more detailed account of these theories, but completely rejected them as valid scientific concepts to be replaced by entirely different accounts. The Churchlands argue that our common-sense concept of belief is similar, in that as we discover more about neuroscience and the brain, the inevitable conclusion will be to reject the belief hypothesis in its entirety.
• Our common-sense understanding of belief is entirely wrong, however treating people, animals and even computers as if they had beliefs, is often a successful strategy - The major proponents of this view, Daniel Dennett and Lynne Rudder Baker, are both eliminativists in that they believe that beliefs are not a scientifically valid concept, but they don’t go as far as rejecting the concept of belief as a predictive device. Dennett gives the example of playing a computer at chess. While few people would agree that the computer held beliefs, treating the computer as if it did (e.g. that the computer believes that taking the opposition’s queen will give it a considerable advantage) is likely to be a successful and predictive strategy. In this understanding of belief, named by Dennett the intentional stance, belief based explanations of mind and behavior are at a different level of explanation and are not reducible to those based on fundamental neuroscience although both may be explanatory at their own level.

Delusional beliefs

Delusions are defined as beliefs in psychiatric diagnostic criteria (for example in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Psychiatrist and historian G.E. Berrios has challenged the view that delusions are genuine beliefs and instead labels them as "empty speech acts," where affected persons are motivated to express false or bizarre belief statements due to an underlying psychological disturbance. However, the majority of mental health professionals and researchers treat delusions as if they were genuine beliefs.

Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and a number of other critics of religion have proposed the idea that many (if not most) faith-based religious beliefs are actually delusional beliefs. Some critics of atheism disagree with this view of religious beliefs. John P. Koster (The Atheist Syndrome), R.C. Sproul (If There is a God Why are There Atheists), Ravi Zacharias (The Real Face of Atheism), Alister McGrath (The Twilight of Atheism), and Paul Vitz (The Psychology of Atheism) have all argued the contrary to one degree or another.

In Lewis Carroll's Alice Through the Looking Glass, the White Queen says, "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." This is often quoted in mockery of the common ability of people to entertain beliefs contrary to fact.

Limiting beliefs

The term limiting belief is used for a belief that inhibits exploration of a wider cognitive space than would otherwise be the case. Examples of limiting beliefs are seen both in animals and people. These may be strongly held beliefs, or held unconsciously, and are often tied in with self-image or perceptions about the world. Everyday examples of limiting beliefs:

• That one has specific capabilities, roles, or traits which cannot be escaped or changed.
• That one cannot succeed so there is no point committing to trying.
• That a particular opinion is right therefore there is no point considering other viewpoints.
• That a particular action or result is the only way to resolve a problem.

See also

Charm Cognitive dissonance Collective belief Culture-specific syndrome Delusion Doxastic logic Evil eye Expectation Faith Folk psychology

Gettier problem Idea Moore's paradox Nocebo Observer-expectancy effect Placebo (origins of technical term) Propositional attitude Propositional knowledge Psychosomatic illness Religion

Self-deception Spell (paranormal) Spirituality Subject-expectancy effect Sugar pill Suggestibility Suggestion Truth Thomas theorem Unintended consequence

External links

• Beliefnet - Belief-o-matic
• Compare Different Beliefs Information on different religions/beliefs
• Beliefs and Practices Belief refers to a part of a wider Spirituality
• Think without Beliefs Does rational thinking require the adherence to beliefs at all?
• Religious Beliefs Submit a belief and read about others' thoughts?
• Beyond Belief A sensibly serious comic perspective on belief\
• Ethics of Belief Classic WK Clifford essay that belief by its nature is unethical, with counterpoint by William James

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Belief and Certainty  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Belief and Certainty"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.