[extropy-chat] HISTORY: Solv... Open the pod door pls Hal

[JDP]

Brett Paatsch a écrit (10.11.2003/08:14) :
> 
> Jacques writes:
> 
> > > Brett Paatsch a écrit (9.11.2003/14:02) :
> > > >
> > > If anyone can find the etymology of the word "belief" or
> > > "believe" I would be interested.
> 
> [lots of interesting stuff - still in his post ] then....
> 
> > To me, we indicate (and this is coherent with the Latin
> > origin) the amount of confidence we have by saying
> >  "I believe that" instead of "I know for sure that". Which
> >  sounds fine to me, no reason to ban this word.
> 
> Please be clear Jacques I am not advocating banning it
> in the sense of prohibiting people from using it - that would
> be impossible as folk who did not even care one way or
> another would start using it just to assert their 'right' too.
> 
> It has to be a voluntary choice to use a more precise word
> and I think that will only happen if individuals see that
> 
> (1) the word they use is sometimes not heard with the same
>  meaning they intended to imbue it with
> (2) in the case of *belief* as a word that consequence
> - ie. the hearer hearing a different meaning than the speaker
> meant - can be very harmful in that it makes it harder for the
> listener to differentiate between two different sorts of
> proposition.
> 
> It is a sublety that goes to the engineering of communication
> (especially in important life and death circumstances). When
> you absolutely positively must get every bit of your meaning
> clear - if you use the word *belief* you find that the hearer
> hears what *they* think you meant not what you think you
> said.


"I believe that X" allows me to express some degree of confidence that
X holds: nothing more, nothing less. If the audience doesn't give a
damn about your level of confidence that X holds, then using this
concept is not useful in that particular situation.

Thus, it is true that in debates, and if you are unknown to the
audience, you might as well not use that word at all, and only provide
facts and arguments for other people to consider and form their own
belief.

But that is not a problem with the word "belief". It is simply that in
this situation, no one cares about your "level of confidence".

Suppose that in such a debate, one guest is a famous and respected
Nobel Prize. Her use of "belief" is going to matter, because people
(rightly or wrongly, doesn't matter here) are interested in her level
of confidence that X holds.

So, I can agree with you on something -- and you'll tell me if this
matches your preoccupation -- namely that if you are in a hostile
situation, and you need to convince people, you may as well give up on
any explicit belief self-attribution, as people may seize the occasion
to think, "oh, this is just a belief, then".

I can also agree that when bringing new ideas (like transhumanist
ideas) into society, we may often find ourselves in such situations,
and hence it may sometimes be preferable to avoid the use of
"belief". (But at other times, I think it may on the contrary be
useful to say that yes, you do believe in it, and you are not just
playing with words.)

Still, I think that 1) potential problems with the use of this word
are not really linked to a common misunderstanding of its meaning, 2)
it is a useful concept, and 3) using it here and there in our
discussions when it comes naturally, to express just what it means,
causes no particular problem.

Jacques