Talk:Belief

Use of the word tenanted

tenanted belief systems are difficult for the tenants to completely revise or reject.

I am not familiar with this use of tenanted, but when I search the phrase tenanted belief systems, I see repeated paraphrases of this Wikipedia article. Can a less novel term be substituted? / edg ☺ ☭ 00:43, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Assumption of empirical epistemology?

The first sentence of the article, "Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty." seems to assume a certain, empirical epistemology. This strikes me as biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9580:3FF0:4D00:4183:E29:E7F9 (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Influence by emotions

Surprised to see article not even mention how emotions influence one's beliefs. Here's one reference[1]. I'll take a stab at writing it one of these days. BecomeFree (talk) 12:13, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

The emotions and beliefs section is an important section to have in this article, but it seems to me that it would be hard to write this section from a neutral standpoint. Brandon436 (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Applying a Greek, Western idea (belief) to every culture in the world?

This article says that belief is a Greek philosophical idea, but then goes on through the entire article, acting that every non-Western people in the world, have something that identifies with the Greek idea of a belief. This is completely untrue. There is dogma in Christianity, and Iman in Islam (Islam was influenced by Greek philosophy), but Judaism didn't have any declared "beliefs" before an Arabic speaking Jewish philosopher in the Middle Ages created a list of what he thought would be them. Buddhism wouldn't say it has beliefs - it would say it used reason to figure out things. Any other religion or culture wouldn't say they "believed", they would say they "know". For example, Hinduism would say they know, Zoroastrians would say they know. Chinese or Japanese would say they know. Tribal religions or cultures would say they know. Belief is a Greco-Roman construct that only has meaning for westerners, but the article doesn't address that at all.Jimhoward72 (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

You could try to address the issue. "Belief" in Greek thought long predates Christianity. See dogma. The corresponding term in Buddhism is View (Buddhism). How do you know "belief" only has meaning for Westerners? Teishin (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Justified true belief

Since any belief is either justified or justified by other beliefs, how can JTB generate knowledge, since basic beliefs are unjustifiable? --Heymid (contribs) 12:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

There are different theories of justification. According to internalist evidentialism, a belief is justified if the believer is in possession of sufficient evidence for it. If this evidence comes in the form of other beliefs, it is inferentially justified. If the evidence comes from perception, for example, it's non-inferentially justified. Non-inferentially justified beliefs are often referred to as basic beliefs. So basic beliefs are justifiable, just not by other beliefs. Phlsph7 (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Dispositionalism and the secret pie

The "Dispositionalism" sub-section states: "For example, one may decide not to affirm that there is a pie in the pantry when asked, because one wants to keep it secret." This seems not to be about a disposition to believe but to be about a disposition to declare a belief to which one is disposed - and hence not relevant here. What if anything like this arises from the sources? If nothing, then remove? Errantius (talk) 23:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your extensive copy editing. Dispositionalism is about dispositions to act, including to perform speech acts: Dispositionalism ... defines beliefs only concerning their role as causes of behavior or as dispositions to behave in a certain way. Otherwise it would be circular: defining beliefs as dispositions to believe. So the example should be fine. I think this example is in one of the articles cited but I would have to check to make sure. Phlsph7 (talk) 05:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

‘Emotion and beliefs’ and ‘Delusion’

These topics seem to be related, especially regarding the discussion in ‘Emotion and beliefs’ on emotion and cognition acting together to produce belief (an interaction that can be similarly attributed to delusion.) It may be best to consolidate these two sections into one for greater cohesion. Eid1803 (talk) 03:12, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The two sections are under developed, but "Emotion and beliefs" would about maintaining belief regardless of feelings of doubt, peer pressure, etc. "Delusion" is about a break from reality, I do not see them as the same at all. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the clarification. Eid1803 (talk) 20:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Adult Development Fall 2023

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 September 2023 and 11 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Simreestolk0 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Simreestolk0 (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Human Senses and Belief

The human senses are based on recognition, we recognize by sight, by sound, by taste, by smell, by touch and by feel. We use feel to recognize energy that makes us feel good, the effect of love that comes from God. Belief data is not transferable to all people while recognialbe data is.Question46 (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Sooooo, what change did you want to make to the article and what citations do you have to support it? If you are just chatting about the subject, this is not a forum. See WP:NOTAFORUM. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 02:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Friesian.com

Friesian.com has been determined to not be a reliable source, but it is used in the section on epistemology to support a description of Socrates/Plato's understanding of knowledge. There must be better sources for this. Can one be substituted? 2601:601:1B80:820:9FF:92D0:6C29:7C52 (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out, I replaced the unreliable source with a citation-needed tag. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)