Minds are for believing.

But does the Lord of the Rings Trilogy exist in reality?

Is this question too difficult for you to answer?

The piece of fiction exists, but it doesn't represent reality. Rather "the Lord of the Rings Trilogy" represents the figment of someone's imagination.
 
How can your belief be a real belief when "it's not true in reality"?

All justified true beliefs are beliefs in reality and come after the fact and not before. You are conflating your opinion or desire with belief. But in reality the truth is what makes belief occur.
A belief is an idea about reality that someone holds to be the case.
They may be right or they may be wrong. If they hold to that belief then it is a real belief.
What fact do justified true beliefs come after? I thought you said belief comes first?
Beliefs occur because people believe. They usually have some reason for that belief but that reasoning may be wrong.
Some people believe the earth is flat. Does the truth make that belief occur?
 
How can your belief be a real belief when "it's not true in reality"?

The definition of belief is: an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

So, by definition a belief does not have to be "true in reality".

All justified true beliefs are beliefs in reality and come after the fact and not before.

Not all beliefs are true and justified.

You are conflating your opinion or desire with belief.

Opinion and belief are often interchangeable. Neither need be true. For example I could express my belief that Brazil will win the world cup as "In my opinion Brazil will win the FIFA World Cup", which means more or less the same as my original statement.

But in reality the truth is what makes belief occur.

No. By definition this is wrong.

Now that I have given you the definition of the word belief, do you understand what it means and why you are wrong?
 
I agree "false beliefs" don't exist in reality.
I don't believe this, and it's dishonest of you to pretend I do by "agreeing" with me.

False beliefs exist in reality, just as the Lord of the Rings trilogy does. Everyone knows this.
 
The believing mind is a faculty that manifests itself in mental phenomena like reasoning, belief, morality, consciousness, logic existence and motivation. A believing mind or mentality is usually contrasted with body, matter or physicality. A believing mind is the mode by which makes the truth and reality known to us.
Then every human has a believing mind except when they are asleep.
 
Then every human has a believing mind except when they are asleep.
Of course. And notably every believing mind, of which there are currently 8 billion functioning examples, believes something different, if only slightly, from all the others. Interrogation of one's own believing mind is the most useless way of uncovering truth I can think of. On the contrary, challenging ones believing mind by searching for evidence of truth, refines and strengthens ones beliefs to the point of knowledge. "I believe it, therefore it's true" is a facile statement. I know that you both search for truth and do not shy away from challenging your own beliefs. It's apparent that the OP doesn't do this.
 
The definition of belief is: an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

So, by definition a belief does not have to be "true in reality".



Not all beliefs are true and justified.



Opinion and belief are often interchangeable. Neither need be true. For example I could express my belief that Brazil will win the world cup as "In my opinion Brazil will win the FIFA World Cup", which means more or less the same as my original statement.



No. By definition this is wrong.

Now that I have given you the definition of the word belief, do you understand what it means and why you are wrong?
Bump for Tercon to address.
 
I believe that Brazil will win the FIFA World Cup.

It's not true in reality, but I still believe it.

After tonight's performance by Brazil...might my belief be true?

Or, maybe my belief in my home country, England...maybe I should believe in them?

What do you think Tercon?
 
Before December 5, 2022 was a guess and only became a belief based on reality after December 5, 2022. Understand?



Maybe you should just learn how to reason properly. A belief in reality or a justified true belief is based in and on reality and before December 5, 2022 your guess wasn't reality based. Understand?
Cool... then your thinking that you with consciously exist after death and you will consciously enjoy either heaven, hell, or wherever is a guess - not a belief.... That's what we atheists always thought.

Settled then.

And before you say something stupid like "straw-man"... look up the definition. What I just did was perfectly "steel-man" your argument.
 
You have a believing mind if and only if you believe belief makes the truth and reality known to you.
This sounds like a given to me. Even scientists believe that the universe can be understood and have laws that they can measure.
 
Strawman. Actually my belief about eternity is based on how the truth and reality works and not your silly unbelief that makes nothing known to anyone including you.



A strawman is when you make up a position and then pretend its someone else's other than your own.

So, all you done was contrive a "strawman", but you done it anyway.

The fact is that you don't know how the truth and reality works, because you are a unbeliever and unbelievers are prohibited from knowing the truth and reality of God. You can't even admit that "false beliefs" are not real beliefs in reality.
Dude... forget it. You just had yourself handed to you. There is no convoluted logic left for you here.
 
But if a believing mind is what makes the truth and reality known to you, then how is challenging what makes the truth and reality known to you make the truth and reality known to you?
Because that is how belief becomes knowledge. Evidence is challenged, in science as it is in law. If it withstands the challenge it becomes stronger. The stronger the challenge, the more reliable it becomes. If it does not meet the challenge but is shown to be faulty, then that shows the belief was false. If you fear to challenge your beliefs, they remain weak and feeble, dismissed by others as futile and false.
 
I accept your surrender.
Yeah... the ol' straw-man of a straw-man trick. LoL... just tie another length of your own personal "lack of reality" rope when you run out. No, you got dropped.... hard. Didn't even bounce with your reply. Splat.
 
Because that is how belief becomes knowledge. Evidence is challenged, in science as it is in law. If it withstands the challenge it becomes stronger. The stronger the challenge, the more reliable it becomes. If it does not meet the challenge but is shown to be faulty, then that shows the belief was false. If you fear to challenge your beliefs, they remain weak and feeble, dismissed by others as futile and false.
This sounds like a given to me. Even scientists believe that the universe can be understood and have laws that they can measure.

You're both running in circles. Evidence is just more of what you believe to be true, so it isn't belief in reality that you are challenging, rather it is your unbelief of the truth and reality, because it is only belief that occurs in reality since unbelief is just a lack of something (belief) that can occur in reality. Unbelief possesses no ontological or epistemological basis, because in unbelief there is no object of belief which is required in order to be known to exist or occur in reality. Understand?
 
Back
Top