0.4.2 Belief and Knowledge

Version 1.0 March 2013                                Previous Version

Some philosophically minded people get hung up on the word “beliefs�.  We don’t.

·       The argument goes like this.  They say that everything that can be called “knowledgeâ€� must be definitely true, otherwise we don't “knowâ€� it for certain.  They call things that are not definitely true, but that we still hold dear, “beliefsâ€�.  They imply these “beliefsâ€� must be dogmatic, because they aren’t definitely true but we still believe them, despite the uncertainty. 

·       Here we don't use the word “beliefsâ€� in this way.  The statements that make up these “global beliefsâ€� are not definitely true, but neither are they dogma.  They are NOT beliefs we hold regardless of reason and the evidence.  They are not “beliefsâ€� devoid of any reasonable justification.  They are not “beliefsâ€� like purely faith based religious beliefs. 

As we said in section 0.0.3, even the scientists who say they don't have “beliefs� must have working hypotheses so that they can think and talk about, and conduct, science.  These understandings are what most ordinary people – like us – call beliefs.  Anyway scientists do believe in the validity of the scientific method!

Instead, we offer our contributions,

o   being as open as we can to all the evidence and to criticism from all parties,

o   knowing there is considerable uncertainty about the basics underlying these beliefs,

o   being as conscientious as we can be to get the reasoning right.

We put forward these “global beliefs� as evidence-based working hypotheses that help us to make decisions on what to do when we need to act.