What is Belief?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Note I raised the thread,
Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25316
There is an inverse correlation between the degree of reality and degree of hallucination

Just because you, veritas, raised a thread does NOT necessarily mean that you are NOT suffering from the exact same condition as what the title of the thread says.

I did not deny I am an exception to that OP.
The conscious reality of ALL humans [me included] is hallucinated by the brain.
I stated there are degrees to reality and it is inverse to degrees of hallucination. I don't think you get what I meant here despite the numerous explanations.

Nb: Absolute = totally unconditional.

Is the Universe, Itself, totally unconditional?

Or, to you, is there NO absolute Universe?

There NO absolute Universe-in-itself, no things-in-themselves.

These emerged from experiences, assumptions, beliefs and justified true beliefs

But when, and if, you are ever truly OPEN, then there are NO assumptions, beliefs, nor justified true beliefs of what COULD BE actually real and true. Once you are completely OPEN, then there is only what IS or Reality. What IS is NOT an hallucination, but rather thee Truth and Reality of things.

However, of course, if you have assumptions, beliefs, and justified true beliefs, like you do veritas, then you can be and quite frequently are IN a state of hallucination. By having assumptions, beliefs, et cetera, then you are OBVIOUSLY consciously creating a "reality", which, also obviously, may NOT fit in with nor even be close to what IS, actually Real and True.

To declare you are truly OPEN and do not have assumptions, beliefs and justified true beliefs is very stupid.
Are you sure you 'know' with 100% certainty the Sun will rise tomorrow? or it is that you believe [assumed truth] that the Sun will rise tomorrow.

which are sufficient and optimal for survival and progress of humanity.

Your beliefs may be "sufficient" and "optimal" for you, BUT beliefs are certainly NOT necessary for the survival and progress of humanity. Unless of course you can SHOW and PROVE otherwise.

In fact, from what I have observed BELIEFS are the very things stopping and preventing human beings from progressing.

Note there are various meanings of 'beliefs' and perhaps you are confining beliefs to theology only.
Note all scientific theories proceeded from beliefs to justified true beliefs and they have contributed significantly and critically to the progress of humanity.

These are based on common sense, conventional sense, scientific, legal, economics, etc.

What ARE "these", which you say are based on common sense, conventional sense, scientific, legal, economics, et cetera?

Are you saying/suggesting that 'relative actual-true-things' ARE based on the above here?
Was the flat earth, of which the sun revolved around, a 'relative actual-true-thing', which was also based on common sense, conventional sense, scientific, legal, economics, et cetera also?
If so, then that speaks for itself.

It is common sense when someone is threatened with a knife, the normal person will avoid the threat because he believes he could be hurt or die. This is relatively real-actual-true to common sense.
It is scientifically true the HIV is very dangerous but note there are some who are naturally immune to the HIV. This is relatively real-actual-true to the scientific perspective.
The fact is whatever is claimed to be real-actual-true, it has to be conditioned to some specific perspective and never by itself.

There are NO real-actual-true-anything in the Absolute sense,

I KNOW that this is what you BELIEVE is thee Truth.

A pity now you WILL just have to acknowledge and accept that you are BELIEVING in some thing that may NOT even be close to the Truth, and in fact be completely and utterly wrong.

More the pity is that that statement of YOURS is a Justified True Belief, to you, and now that statement can not NOT be wrong, nor incorrect, which by itself is obviously a very contradictory predicament that you are in NOW.

The majority of critical knowledge to humanity is scientific which is Justified True Beliefs or polished conjectures. Do you pity all the scientists in the world?

but there are real-actual-true-anything in the relative/conditional sense. Note these are not map-territory things but emergent things.

You, human beings, can keep on emerging to finally see more and more of the Real and Actual Truth if you so want to continue that way. I have already explained, enough times already, HOW you can SEE what IS and KNOW the Truth already.

There is NO need to wait for the Truth to emerge, especially when the Truth is, literally, staring you in the face, RIGHT NOW. Thee Truth is HERE for ALL to SEE, unfortunately though, human beings have NOT yet evolved to SEE and UNDERSTAND this yet, when this is written.

The problem with an alien like you is because you are believing in an illusion which you believed is really real.

'What is" cannot stand alone, it must always be predicated/conditioned upon a Framework and perspective, thus relative and not absolute.

Therefore, IF ALL agree on what is a real-actual-true-apple IS, then, in as far as an absolute sense can be, then that IS, what that 'apple' IS.

This is an impossibility, i.e.
it is impossible for ALL to agree what is a real-actual-true-apple IS or whatever an empirical thing is in the absolute sense.

REALLY?

This 'impossibility' thing sounds just like some thing in and of the 'absolute sense'. Or, can you NOT hear this?

Nope.
The "impossibility' is conditioned to the human conditions, this is relative not absolute.

I have given my justifications above.

You may have given YOUR "justifications", but by YOUR very own "logic" YOUR own "justifications" are only relative, and relative to you only, which has emerged from YOUR experiences. Obviously YOUR relative, to you, real-actual-true "justifications" are NOT the Actual-Real-True Justifications, which would be for and by EVERY one. Therefore, your ATTEMPT at providing True Justifications is completely unsatisfactory and insufficient to and for ALL of US. Although those "justifications" may be "sufficient" enough to and for YOU, and YOUR beliefs, veritas. They CERTAINLY are NOT sufficient to and for US.

Nope!
I was referring on the basis of the collective.
Note I have always used "intersubjective consensus", "shared-beliefs," the collective and the likes.

"ALL of US" ??? btw, you insist you are NOT a member of "you human beings." So which alien group are you referring re "ALL of US". If there are more entities than yourself, they are delusional.

I had used 'apple' as an example, but the philosophical fact is there are NO real-actual-true-anything in the Absolute sense.

Do you think or belief that by adding the word 'philosophical' in YOUR statement now provides more strength and/or more support to YOUR "justification" in YOUR state of hallucinated conscious reality now?

Note ALL are in a state of hallucination of their conscious reality.
By 'philosophy' imply I am bringing all the tools of philosophy-proper [esp. critical thinking] into my thinking arsenal.

If you do not agree with apples, show me what 'thing' is real-actual-true in the absolute sense.

How many times do I have to show you?

If ALL agree on some thing (any thing), then there is NO one disagreeing.
Therefore, THAT agreement, whatever THAT is, is Real, is Actual, and is True in the absolute sense, (or what may also be KNOWN as thee Truth).

Can you SEE the 'thing' NOW?

Philosophically, the usual argument to claim a thing exists in the absolute objective sense is that the thing is grounded on ousia or essence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousia

The other is to ground whatever thing on God as the ultimate absolute.

If your argument of the real-actual-true absolute thing is not grounded on the above, then where is your personal argument for it?

Where My argument IS; is WHERE it has been from the outset here. That is; In My WORDS.

If we are ALL in agreement, then there is NO THING in dispute, nor NOTHING unambiguous, nor NOTHING to show nor say that 'IT' (whatever 'IT' is that IS in agreement) is any thing other than a FACT, in the absolute sense. It is in the 'absolute sense' because there is, literally, absolutely NOTHING else.

What IS, which is in agreement with and by ALL would be, obviously, totally unconditional.

Hopefully you have understood this by now, so then you can move onto your next point of contention, of which I am already able to counter.

Let us please move on, NOW.

"ALL in agreement" is an impossibility because all humans have different views as like their finger prints. What humans agreed are merely compromised agreements.

The main point of contention is;

You are not a human being and do not have any beliefs.
It is impossible for humans not to have assumptions, beliefs and justified true belief to survive for long.

Show me something that is absolutely real-true-actual without any assumptions, beliefs and justified true beliefs?
If you don't like "apple" you can use 'table' or any thing as an example.

Btw, don't use the "ALL in agreement" i.e. ALL [100%] all humans which is absurd.
Usually 'ALL' always refer to a majority within a certain specific group.
It is never ALL people nor ALL Scientists nor All Physicists agree with the theories of Quantum Mechanics.

So, if you touch a common table in your home or office, it is absolutely real?
(note Russell's 'Perhaps there is no table at all')

[Age]

veritas, you are so stuck in BELIEFS and therefore you are so closed and shut off from seeing anything other than what you already BELIEVE is true, I think there is no use pointing out ALL the errors that you make.

If someone else wants me to SHOW those errors, or explain or answer anything else, then I WILL. Otherwise I will just leave this for now.

[Dalek Prime]

That which one accepts as true.

[Veritas Aequitas]

veritas, you are so stuck in BELIEFS and therefore you are so closed and shut off from seeing anything other than what you already BELIEVE is true, I think there is no use pointing out ALL the errors that you make.

If someone else wants me to SHOW those errors, or explain or answer anything else, then I WILL. Otherwise I will just leave this for now.

You stated you don't have any beliefs and implied you are not a human being like us the rest of us implied as stupid.
Your views are a problem because they are not grounded on justified true beliefs, i.e. existing empirical-rational knowledge.
You cannot even show what your beliefs [or illusions] are closely associated with any current thoughts and philosophy.

On the other hand, how can my views be CLOSED and SHUT OFF when all my views are based on existing empirical-rational grounds and justified with sound rational arguments with sufficient references to existing knowledge?

YOU are the problem.
I had stated I'll wanted to stop discussing with you due to your lack of evidence, references and arguments but somehow got drag into it again.

[Age]

veritas, you are so stuck in BELIEFS and therefore you are so closed and shut off from seeing anything other than what you already BELIEVE is true, I think there is no use pointing out ALL the errors that you make.

If someone else wants me to SHOW those errors, or explain or answer anything else, then I WILL. Otherwise I will just leave this for now.

You stated you don't have any beliefs and implied you are not a human being like us the rest of us implied as stupid.

If you say so.

But, are you now trying to imply that human beings do not do stupid things?

Your views are a problem because they are not grounded on justified true beliefs,

This is another case of stupidity.

OF COURSE my views are NOT grounded on justified true BELIEFS, nor any other BELIEFS for that matter. One would have to have any type of a BELIEF for their views to be grounded on ANY KIND of BELIEF, justified belief, justified true belief, or just plain old BELIEF.

I do NOT have any BELIEFS at all, whatsoever, always, ever. UNDERSTOOD?

My VIEWS, obviously, are NOT grounded on any type of BELIEF, justified or not. And, as long as I remain having NO beliefs, my VIEWS will, also very obviously, NEVER be grounded on any BELIEF whatsoever.

This speaks for itself. You did NOT need to mention this here.

Also, my VIEWS are NOT necessarily a problem at all. That is because as long as I am NOT having BELIEFS, then my VIEWS are ALWAYS OPEN, which allows me to SEE the Truth of things, always. Unlike the problem one has when they are holding a BELIEF. The problem being; How can one SEE the "other" side, or, SEE from "another's" perspective, if they are BELIEVING one thing ONLY?

i.e. existing empirical-rational knowledge.

You really do NEED to get rid of the BELIEF that one NEEDS to BELIEVE things, that is if you really do want to SEE the TRUTH of things.

You, veritas, can BELIEVE 'existing empirical-rational knowledge' is 100% True, Right, and/or Correct, or even partly true, right, and/or correct, if you so like. But WHY would a person even WANT to BELIEVE some thing that MAY NOT BE true, right, nor correct in the first place, let alone BELIEVE that they NEED to BELIEVE it IS.

veritas, are you at all aware that 'a flat earth' and 'that a earth of which the sun revolved around' WAS 'existing empirical-"rational" knowledge' at some particular point?

And, are you at all aware that if you were around at that particular time, then you would be one of the very last ones to SEE and accept that the opposite of this 'existing empirical-rational knowledge' is the Actual Truth of things.

You would be saying that they are Justified True Beliefs, and so you would BELIEVE them to be more True, more Right, and more Correct, more so.

You cannot even show what your beliefs [or illusions] are closely associated with any current thoughts and philosophy.

OF COURSE I can NOT show what my BELIEFS are. When are you going to realize one has to HAVE BELIEFS, to be able to show them.

The VERY REASON you can NOT show what you allege my BELIEFS are, IS because I do NOT have any.

On the other hand, how can my views be CLOSED and SHUT OFF when all my views are based on existing empirical-rational grounds and justified with sound rational arguments with sufficient references to existing knowledge?

As your words have just spoken for themselves, and have just SHOWN how CLOSED and SHUT OFF you really ARE, there really is NO need for me to answer your OWN question here.

Are you aware that ALL people who BELIEVED that the sun revolved around the earth, (when the Actual and Real Truth was being explained to them) would have also "justified" their BELIEF, by thinking and stating things similar to; All my views are based on EXISTING empirical-rational grounds and justified with sound rational arguments with sufficient references to existing knowledge, also?

BEFORE and during the time a person WAS explaining to these people what the Actual Truth IS, these people, were behaving in the EXACT SAME way as you are doing, and SHOWING, here. That is; SHOWING just how CLOSED and SHUT OFF from the Real and Actual Truth of things.

Are you aware of just how many times throughout human history 'EXISTING empirical-rational knowledge' (based on any amount of "rational" arguments, with any amount of "sufficient" references, to any EXISTING knowledge) WAS and IS WRONG?

Can you fathom just how much of the "existing" knowledge, in the days of when this is written, which is BELIEVED to be True, BECAUSE "it" is based on any amount of "justifications", IS actually WRONG?

YOU are the problem.

That is a very off the mark comment.

I think you have missed the mark completely here.

Unless, of course, you explain what is meant by the word 'problem' here, and, you can SHOW how I am, supposedly, that definition or "thing".

I had stated I'll wanted to stop discussing with you due to your lack of evidence, references and arguments but somehow got drag into it again.

Maybe you get, so called, "dragged back in to this again" is because of your NEED to be RIGHT, which is obviously so strong within you, as it comes across as very NEEDY part of you.

Also, I am NOT actually writing in argumentative form here. So, I do NOT need to provide any evidence, references and arguments.

Although, subliminally, how I am writing is providing, from your writings, the evidence NEEDED to SHOW just HOW the Mind and the brain work.
Also what is SEEN here is how the BELIEF-system interferes with the brain, and prevents it from SEEING the Truth of things.
From our discussion and words here what is also SEEN is just how the BELIEF-system "TRIES TO" interfere with the Mind, but, obviously, that system is completely unsuccessful.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Your views are a problem because they are not grounded on justified true beliefs,

This is another case of stupidity.

OF COURSE my views are NOT grounded on justified true BELIEFS, nor any other BELIEFS for that matter. One would have to have any type of a BELIEF for their views to be grounded on ANY KIND of BELIEF, justified belief, justified true belief, or just plain old BELIEF.

I do NOT have any BELIEFS at all, whatsoever, always, ever. UNDERSTOOD?

My VIEWS, obviously, are NOT grounded on any type of BELIEF, justified or not. And, as long as I remain having NO beliefs, my VIEWS will, also very obviously, NEVER be grounded on any BELIEF whatsoever.

You are deluding yourself.
As long as you are human being you cannot escape from having beliefs as defined in the OP.

[Age]

Your views are a problem because they are not grounded on justified true beliefs,

This is another case of stupidity.

OF COURSE my views are NOT grounded on justified true BELIEFS, nor any other BELIEFS for that matter. One would have to have any type of a BELIEF for their views to be grounded on ANY KIND of BELIEF, justified belief, justified true belief, or just plain old BELIEF.

I do NOT have any BELIEFS at all, whatsoever, always, ever. UNDERSTOOD?

My VIEWS, obviously, are NOT grounded on any type of BELIEF, justified or not. And, as long as I remain having NO beliefs, my VIEWS will, also very obviously, NEVER be grounded on any BELIEF whatsoever.

You are deluding yourself.
As long as you are human being you cannot escape from having beliefs as defined in the OP.

Can you prove that I have beliefs?

If so, then do it.

What are my alledged beliefs?

[Arising_uk]

Can you prove that I have beliefs?

If so, then do it.

What are my alledged beliefs?

Do you believe the Earth is a sphere?

[Walker]

Has any one any strong argument on there is no need for beliefs or no such thing as beliefs?

The alternative to belief is probability.

There’s a high probability that when I look out the window the world I see will correlate with memory of the world, so I can assume that some unseen causal relationships based on high probability exist, rather than believe they exist.

Counting cards in blackjack reveals the low probability of hitting a face card after many face cards have already been played since the last shuffle, and attention to probability shapes the expectation of hitting a lower card, but that doesn’t cause belief in hitting a lower card.

I know that when the day is done so ends the shining sun, but this is a high probability based on past experience, and not a belief.

Machines that buy and sell stock do not rely on belief, and there is a high probability that those machines were created by humans, but this likelihood does not require a belief.

[Age]

Can you prove that I have beliefs?

If so, then do it.

What are my alledged beliefs?

Do you believe the Earth is a sphere?

I neither believe nor disbelieve any thing.

[Logik]

Can you prove that I have beliefs?

If so, then do it.

What are my alledged beliefs?

I will give it a try....

I neither believe nor disbelieve any thing.

You believe that "you neither believe nor disbelieve any thing."

[Age]

Has any one any strong argument on there is no need for beliefs or no such thing as beliefs?

Is there ANY argument, at all, for there being no such things as beliefs. I wonder. You, veritas, are living PROOF that there are such a thing as beliefs.

However, if animals can live without beliefs, then there is no need for beliefs.

Animals can, and do, live without beliefs.
Human beings are animals.
Human beings, therefore, like ALL other animals, can live without beliefs.
So, there is NO need for beliefs.

Human beings, as a whole, evolve.
At some stage in human beings' evolution, or before, there were no beliefs.
Human beings evolved, or came, from a period where there were NO beliefs.
Human beings are existing now.
Therefore, there is NO need for beliefs.
(Unless of course it can be argued, and/or shown, that beliefs came into existence at the very moment that started existence itself, or beliefs have existed forever just like Existence, Itself, has).

Human beings, individually, evolve.
As some stage, from conception, in a human being's evolution there are NO beliefs.
Most human beings go on to survive.
Therefore, this is more evidence and proof, that there is NO need for beliefs.
(Unless of course it can be argued, and/or shown, that beliefs came into existence at the exact same time as each and every human being comes into existence, or beliefs were in the sperm and/or egg before that moment of conception).

If any one wants to "argue" that there is a NEED for beliefs, then WHEN did this NEED begin:
For human beings, collectively?
For human beings, individually?

And, WHEN did this BELIEF, that beliefs are NEEDED for evolution to keep on doing its thing, begin?

Also, IF beliefs are NEEDED, then what exactly do those BELIEFS entail?

[Logik]

However, if animals can live without beliefs, then there is no need for beliefs.

Another belief you hold is that animals live without beliefs.

[Dalek Prime]

Age, have you ever stubbed your toe? Have you ever eaten? Slept? Gotten out of bed? Gotten a haircut? Or even imagined you did anything a human must?

Do you then believe you did any of those things, or believed to have imagined them?

Even a solipsist imagines he has mentally created the image, and believes he did it. Are you worse than a solipsist?

[Dalek Prime]

However, if animals can live without beliefs, then there is no need for beliefs.

Another belief you hold is that animals live without beliefs.

Oh, don't start with good reasoning, Logik...

I wonder if he believes he has posted in this forum? Or believes he has an email address and password that allowed him to gain access?

Meh. Who knows.