this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
74 points (91.1% liked)

Asklemmy

44152 readers
721 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Belief regards opinions, in which people have a free choice to accept or reject the idea. There is no notion of rightness or wrongness.

Knowledge regards conclusions from a set of axioms, in which people who accept the axioms are honor-bound to accept the conclusions. To reject the conclusion while accepting the axioms would be wrong.

In my life, this governs when I can freely choose and when I am obliged to accept a claim based on whether I've accepted previous claims.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So, if we haven't studied the underlying axioms or foundation of a conclusion, we cannot have knowledge of it? That seems to imply the only things we have knowledge of are the things we have invested significant time and energy into. It's that correct?

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Id say thats quite obviously the way it works. How would you have knowledge on something if you havent researched it thoroughly? If you are just parroting what someone else told you its no better than hear-say.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

You don't need to study axioms in order to accept them, but once you accept them, then you must accept any soundly derived conclusion from them. Belief doesn't need to be logically consistent, but knowledge does.

As for investing significant time and energy, I would say that that depends on things such as the length of the chain of reasoning or the difficulty/cost of testing a hypothesis or how closely observations match your intuition. Some knowledge is cheap to acquire, such as "the sun rises in the east", because we can observe it directly and we can clearly identify the direction of east and the sun's path in the sky is very stable from day to day.