Belief: Difference between revisions

'''Belief''' is a  psychological state in which an individual holds a [[conjecture]] or [[premise]] to be [[truth|true]].<ref>{{Citation |last=Schwitzgebel |first=Eric |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward |contribution=Belief |title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=The Metaphysics Research Lab |location=Stanford, CA |year=2006 |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/belief/ |accessdate=2008-09-19}}</ref>

[[Dispositional and occurrent belief]] concerns the contextual activation of the belief into thoughts (reactive of propositions) or ideas (based on the belief's premise).

[[File:certainty.png|thumb]]

The terms ''belief'' and ''knowledge'' are used differently in philosophy.

A false belief is not considered to be knowledge, even if it is sincere. A sincere believer in the [[flat earth theory]] does not ''know'' that the Earth is flat.{{citation needed|date=October 2013}} Later epistemologists, for instance [[Edmund Gettier|Gettier]] (1963)<ref>{{cite journal |last=Gettier |first=E. L. |year=1963 |title=Is justified true belief knowledge? |journal=[[Analysis (journal)|Analysis]] |volume=23 |issue=6 |pages=121–123 |doi= |jstor=3326922 }}</ref> and [[Alvin Goldman|Goldman]] (1967),<ref>{{cite journal |last=Goldman |first=A. I. |year=1967 |title=A causal theory of knowing |journal=[[The Journal of Philosophy]] |volume=64 |issue=12 |pages=357–372 |doi= |jstor=2024268 }}</ref> have questioned the "justified true belief" definition.

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 abstract in their analysis, and much of the work examining the viability of the belief concept stems from philosophical analysis.

* ''Our common-sense understanding of belief is entirely wrong and will be completely superseded by a radically different theory that will have no use for the concept of belief as we know it'' - Known as [[eliminativism]], this view, (most notably proposed by [[Paul Churchland|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 [[eliminativism|eliminativists]] in that they hold 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 behaviour 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.

==Formation==

However, even educated people, well aware of the process by which beliefs form, still strongly cling to their beliefs, and act on those beliefs even against their own self-interest. In Anna Rowley's book, Leadership Therapy, she states "You want your beliefs to change. It's proof that you are keeping your eyes open, living fully, and welcoming everything that the world and people around you can teach you." This means that peoples' beliefs should evolve as they gain new experiences.<ref>{{cite book |last=Rowley |first=Anna |title=Leadership Therapy: Inside the Mind of Microsoft |location=Basingstoke |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=2007 |page=69 |isbn=1-4039-8403-4 }}</ref>

There are several techniques to change the internal beliefs.<ref> http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/1806/180621195006.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.pathwaytohappiness.com/writings_falsebeliefs.htm</ref>

==Systems==