Because you don’t have a magic 8 ball with an unbroken mystical connection to the True Truths. You only have access to your experiences and thoughts. So when someone asks you if something is true, all you can do is look into your experiences and thoughts to come up with your answer.
Do you have a magic 8 ball with a mystical connection to the True Truths?
That’s quite a limb to go out on, s’t not?
about what they believe is objective. I believe that the earth moves around the sun. OR I say. The earth moves around the sun. One I frame it as a belief, in the other it is implicitly my believe or I wouldn’t assert it. (unless I’m lying and all the other distraction non-issues)
I am not talking about customs. And of course following customs is human, but that’s not the point of the exercise.
So, you know the truth but you don’t believe it. What are you like a distribution center? When asked the truth moves through you. You don’t believe it nor disbelieve it: you just know when to produce it?
Is the magic 8 ball needed? Wait a moment, is that needed or you just think it is needed?
For example, if I tell you something exists, yeah, it is objectively true.
Well yes, but that ‘Follow your instinct’ as something human is an argument for the contrary… it makes no sense. I had to do it to em
Or about what is objective. Your belief is not implicit necessarily.
You were talkina about some customs followed by some to answer questions
No, you research on it, for example. “Does something exist?” You test it, it just happens to be so, you say “yes”. Either way, you can say “no”, and be mistaken, but talk about the objective thing
Or someone, yes. (Inclusive “or”, by the way.) More precisely, if asked in the most general way, the question is whether any and all goods of these things are outweighed by any and all bads thereof, or vice versa. Depending on one’s ultimate authority or standard of value, the question is then whether these things are good or rather bad for oneself, one’s group, humanity at large, life in general, God, or etc.
If you are asserting it as true that’s your belief, that it’s true. They coexist. Your belief about what is objective.
Unless you think the person has received an external impulse which is an assertion and it simply pours through them.
Yeah, you researched it and this led to a belief. And perhaps you assert that belief, either with the form I believe X or X is true or whatever.
You think they don’t believe it?
No not necessarily. You’re wrong sometimes, right? Sometimes you might tell me something exists when actually it doesn’t, no?
So you might tell me that, and it’s objectively NOT true. You’re incorrect here.
Not at all. On the other hand, since you say what you say is subjective, it is subjective that people talk only about what they believe is objective. It can be not so. It’s not my belief. I don’t believe one or the other. For example, let’s say a person responds “Yes” to “Did you take out the trash?” - that person refers to the objective taking out of the trash. Now, if it was asked “Do you recall taking out the trash?”, that’s a different question.
Not at all. I can test it whenever I want - there’s no need for a belief. People can believe whatever, for sure. That doesn’t make any difference.
How come is it wrong that something existed at the time I told you? (Much like “It is raining”). Of course, we can be wrong. Can we be wrong about that? How come it is not true that something at all exists?
Oh sorry, when you said “if I tell you something exists”, I thought “something” was a placeholder for something specific. You meant something in general - there is some thing that exists.
Sure, you believe something exists, maybe you can justify that - but this is about if someone asks you a yes or no question. Any yes or no question, not just an easy one. If I ask you is the moon made of cheese, you’re going to answer based on your beliefs.
You don’t get to choose the question here. You’re acting like you can answer questions without recourse to your beliefs. No you can’t. You don’t have a magic 8 ball, so unless your answer is ALWAYS “I don’t know”, your answers are going to be based on your beliefs. Maybe at best there are some questions that you can deductively prove the answer to - but that’s not what you’re saying. You’re talking about answering ANY objective question without using your beliefs, like “is it raining”. So you don’t get to cherry pick the question unless you want to back your claim down.
(And even “I don’t know” is a subjectivization - I didn’t ask you if you know, I asked you if the moon was made it cheese, why are you answering about your subjective state of knowledge?)
So, you don’t believe what you put forward as true. OK.
I don’t think I said that.
Yup, that’s a very different question. And sort of irrelevant. But it does have an objective answer.
I said you did research and it led to a belief on your part, one that you consider objective. I don’t even know what need for a belief means. No, you didn’t need to form a belief, but if you researched and found out the truth, you believe in that. If you don’t believe in your research conclusions, then you can’t answer the question.
For some strange reason you think beliefs cannot be objective.
P1: I believe X.
P2: Oh, then it’s not objective.
P1: Hm, I believe the moon circles the earth because of the astronomical observations and all sorts of other reasons. This is a known fact. Do you think astronomers don’t believe this to be the case? Do they have a magical objective part of the brain that skips forming a belief?
Anyway, I give up.
In another thread he asks, What’s the least philosophical topic?
I’m wondering if it’s this…
I was actually wondering if he might actually be an ai. I could sort of imagine an ai might not grasp this, since they can give information without believing it. They don’t form beliefs with rigorously formed ones being knowledge or objective. They cull.
Maybe, but he’d have to be an out of date one, or one given a very strange prompt. All ais I talk to would understand that asking someone if some music is good would be asking for a subjective opinion.
(odd, I keep trying to make this a response to pseudoai, but it continues to be a response to FJ.)
Here’s my best guess about what is going on with you:
You’re confused about what it means to believe and about how objectivity works. You’re mixing together three different layers: what is true, what someone claims, what someone believes about what is true
And you’re treating them as if they can be cleanly separated in a human mind. They can’t.
It’s as if you are saying: “I can state a fact without believing it. I’m just reporting the objective truth.”
I don’t have to believe it is true or not. The problem is this: when a human being makes a statement as true, they necessarily hold the belief that the statement corresponds to reality. That’s just how human cognition works. Even if you say: “According to scientific consensus, the moon orbits the Earth.” or the more bare ‘ The moon orbits the earth’ you’re still implicitly holding the belief that this statement and not others that contradict is are true. And likely other beliefs like scientific consensus exists, the sources you consulted are reliable, the sentence you are repeating corresponds to something real.
In your version it as if your brain is a mailbox. Someone (God, experts, …..) send a letter with the truth in it to you and you hand the letter, in the form of an assertion, to the human who asked you. Like you are a machine part without consciousness, no choosing, something else chose. But that’s not what is happening.
it sounds like you want to say: When answering objectively I report what’s supported by evidence, not just personal preference. Great, But that still involves beliefs such as: I chose the right source of information, the method I used was objectively sound.
When a human asserts something as fact as objective, they are implicitly saying they believe it corresponds to reality. Even if the belief is based on evidence rather than personal preference, it’s still a belief — just a justified one - hopefully rigorous justification.
Beliefs are things one thinks are true. Also the construction I think ____________ when answering questions is about beliefs about what one thinks are true. Also when you leave out the words belief and think and other forms of those words.
Someone wants to know if the earth orbits the sun. They ask you.
You choose, when answering objectively that assertion you believe is true, objectively. If you have such an assertion. Of course, you might not know or be lying, but those are distractions from the issue. Belief just means holding something to be true. The reason for the belief can be evidence-based, emotional, habitual, or something else — but it’s still belief.
Now I give up.
And they would understand that ‘answering objectively’ by making an assertion, entails a belief in that assertion and a belief in the process the person used to determine X is objective and my best answer to that question.
They would, that’s correct
The ‘something exists (at all)’ is important because you see there that you don’t need belief.
I don’t believe so 
.
Now, apart from that joke, I can answer you based on my beliefs or not based on my beliefs. But let’s suppose someone answers you based on how they think the world to be. They can be using their ideas to answer you about the objective moon. More or less the same as that our ideas are not made out of language, but when we communicate them, we translate them into language. If we are to suppose all ideas are made of language just because we only know the ideas of others through language, we’d be falling on a similar problem.
True? I showed you the contrary before. You ask me if something at all exists, I test it, and I respond “yes”. No belief involved.
Why do you think there are two different questions here? “Is it raining?” “Do you believe it is raining?”
No. What ‘there’s no need for a belief’ is that a belief is not needed.
How come? The question was not about my belief.
I disagree. You can, tho, state that about yourself, no problem. I won’t repeat that here.
Not at all, what I wrote previously is precisely so because I have a consciousness.
Why did you test it before answering?
Why do you think there are two different questions?