Jens Oliver Meiert

On the Anatomy of Beliefs

Post from November 8, 2015 (↻ December 19, 2016), filed under .

As alluded to in my last as well as at the end of this post, my academic studies reveal with force how much I am a philosophy student. The following is not strictly new; it’s found in a number of places (Dualism!) set up by a number of philosophers. Yet I publish as is, to keep with this blog’s schedule and authenticity, and to allow you and me to develop and progress together.

From a philosophical viewpoint, here a strictly solipsistic one, any statement is a belief.

Beliefs are important because they determine how we interpret, and per some schools of thought, make our realities. In a nutshell, hence, paying attention to and working with our beliefs is crucial for a constructive life experience.

The strength of a belief, then, may be represented as follows.

SB = TB

(S = Strength, B = Belief, T = Trust in perception.)

In words, the strength of a belief equals the trust in the perception of the belief. Perception is physical: In most cases, we’d make a particular experience leading us to a belief, or someone would tell us something that leads us to a belief. Hence trust is relevant: How strong the belief is depends on how much we trust our sense organs or the conveyor of the message.

This model applies to new beliefs. It gets more complicated when we consider that there are pre-existing beliefs that may overlap or eradicate new beliefs. Hence:

SB = TB – SB(old)

(B(old) = old related belief.)

In words, the strength of a belief equals the trust in the perception of the belief, minus any old related beliefs.

An example. Someone may have learned that eating a lot of fruit is healthy. That is a belief (not strictly a fact of life). The belief came from the person’s trusted parents and got reinforced through trusted media. It’s strong. Someone now listens to the radio and picks up the idea—another belief—that fruit contained sugar, and that sugar would be harmful for the body. The strength of that new belief would now depend on the trust in the perception of radio and senders, minus the strength of the related old belief in the healthiness of fruit.

This is a simplified model, and yet the problem is not that it’s simple. The problem is that this model is all physical. It hinges on perception. By doing that it rules out entirely that our beliefs may also have other sources; and since perception, how (not properly) defined here, is tied to physical reality, too, we couldn’t even trust any other sources, either.

I, like other philosophers I’m just getting to know, put up the hypothesis that this is nonsense. It is inconceivable that the only way to believe something is through perception. It contradicts our facilities (mind), our experience (life), and certainly our institutions (religions). (If I get Kant right, then he found the idea nonsense, too, when talking about noumena.)

What is missing is actually not hard to find. The other source we have is our imagination—our ideas—, and the way that source gets credibility is through faith.

SB = (TB ∨ FB) – SB(old)

(F = faith in idea.)

In words, the strength of a belief equals the trust in the perception of the belief or the faith in the idea of the belief, minus any old related beliefs.

This, I venture to say, is despite all simplicity a better, more realistic model of how beliefs basically work. It is another so far simple way, too, to show how the scientific method is limited, for it probes statements (beliefs) about reality solely by means of (strong) trust in perception. This, now, leads only to explain parts of our world.

Although I suppose this is both in line and in conflict with a number of theories I, this comfortable thinker-student-writer, just go ahead with this. For a moment. Eh.

I wants to beliefs. Srsly.

Figure: I could have barely picked a better post to start with cat memes.

About the Author

Jens Oliver Meiert, photo of July 27, 2015.

Jens Oliver Meiert is a developer (O’Reilly, W3C, ex-Google) and philosopher. He experiments with art and adventure. Here on meiert.com he shares and generalizes and exaggerates some of his thoughts and experiences.

There’s more Jens in the archives and at Amazon. If you have any questions or concerns (or recommendations) about what he writes, leave a comment or a message.

Read More

Have a look at the most popular posts, possibly including:

Or maybe say hi on Twitter, Google+, or LinkedIn?

Looking for a way to comment? Comments have been disabled, unfortunately.

Flattr? Found a mistake? Email me, jens@meiert.com.

You are here: HomeArchive2015 → On the Anatomy of Beliefs

Last update: December 19, 2016

“The end does not justify the means.”