I’m not interested in what the dictionary says or a textbook definition I’m interested in your personal distinction between the two ideas. How do you decide to put an idea in one category versus the other? I’m not interested in the abstract concepts like ‘objective truth’ I want to know how it works in real life for you.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I think everyone inhabits a sort of superposition of all possible worlds consistent with their sensory observations. But there are some of those possible worlds with which we identify more strongly—where we feel more ourselves. So belief is a kind of probability multiplied by self-recognition.

    For example: “We believe these truths to be self-evident, that all [people] are created equal”, etc.—it’s not an assertion of objective truth, it’s a declaration of which world we choose to live in.

    • an_onanist@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      So the stronger the feeling of identifying with a concept, the stronger the belief that it is true?

      • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        That’s one factor; objective (or Bayesian) probability is the other.

        Like, there are too many things that might be true, or that might come to pass, for me to consider all of them at once. So I filter out most of them by dissociating myself from the worlds in which they’re true: saying “I don’t believe that will happen” isn’t saying it’s impossible, it’s saying “I don’t recognize myself in the person that would happen to”.

        But the more you commit your sense of self to worlds that are tenuous or impossible, the greater the likelihood that you end up in a real situation where you no longer recognize yourself—and then you face an identity crisis.