Why all our beliefs are false

I think we have to stick logic in here somewhere. While it may be futile to prove the validity or Truth of a belief one may have (for the sake of the topic, say, god or evolution), the logic we place on the beliefs we accept play an important role, i think.

It's logical, for example, to believe in the theory of evolution -- that is, at this given moment in time, and with the amount of scientific knowledge we have attained as a human race at this time. That isn't to say that the current theory is the Truth, nor that it indeed claims to be so, however, at the present time, as with all science, it's the most logical "truth" that can be established. On that note, though, the purpose of science, and evolution included, is not to label theories and hypothesis as absolute Truths, anyway. They label and explain things that can be altered and improved upon in the future. Newton and Einstein are testament to that.

Personally I don't think there are such things as absolute Truths, anyway. We, as humans, may percieve something to be true and logical -- for example, a chair in a room that provides a solid base for us to sit on -- but, at other perspectives, in this case, for example, at an atomic scale, the chair is made up simply of atoms, like you or I. At what level of "Truth" is it that the chair is in fact solid? And if it is solid simply because we percieve it to be, then that is obviously only a biased perspective of Truth.

That being said, we could say that, from our perspective, the logical conclusion is for the chair to be in fact solid... however, that should by no means presuppose the Truth.

 

When I started to read this thread, I thought I was going to have something intelligent to add. But as I kept reading, I got more and more confused and now my brain hurts.

This thread broke my brane!!!!

--Koala3K

 

How can you say that someone's beliefs are false? That's like saying "You're stupid because you don't believe the same thing I do."

 

I agree with everything that epic says, but the point of my original argument is that if you accept the theory of evolution, which it is rational to believe in (given its evidence)then there is no guarantee that our beliefs are true.

We think that a function of our cognitive faculties (beliefs, memories, etc.) is provide us with true beliefs.

But evolution is about successful behavior, not about providing true beliefs, so by the theory of evolution there is no good reason to think our beliefs are true.

This means that the theory of evolution is self-defeating. So, although there is plenty of evidence that supports evolution, by accepting evolution, the entire system (the evidence and the conclusion) is screwy.

Beowulf: Telling people their beliefs are false isn't telling them that they're stupid. One is helpful for them, the other is just hurtful and unnecessary.

1st: there are lots of times that you can tell people that their beliefs are false or likely to be false- when they use poor reasoning, base their beliefs on insufficeint or mistaken evidence.

For example, if you believe I'm a girl, I could inform you that I'm not.

And by saying you believe falsely, I'm not telling you that you're stupid, but correcting your mistaken belief. No one should take offense to being told they're wrong, they should be grateful. Isn't it better to move away from error?

Of course lots of people do take offense to being told they're wrong, but that's because for lots of people it's all about ego
People care more about having a reputation for wisdom than actually having wisdom. So, they get upset when they're told they're wrong or don't have wisdom - but isn't it for their own good?

I hope it doesn't sound vain of me to say that.it's just that I'd prefer to be told I'm wrong and, most importantly, why I'm wrong.

 

BLKLBL: if you accept the theory of evolution, which it is rational to believe in (given its evidence)then there is no guarantee that our beliefs are true.

We think that a function of our cognitive faculties (beliefs, memories, etc.) is provide us with true beliefs.

But evolution is about successful behavior, not about providing true beliefs, so by the theory of evolution there is no good reason to think our beliefs are true.

This means that the theory of evolution is self-defeating.

If I'm correct in understanding your point, I think there is a difference here between the process evolution and the theory of evolution. When we talk about the theory, that is, hypothesised and theorised by Darwin and others, we're talking about something that is being described by man, and thus, with our finite knowledge (although always improving) can't be claimed to be the Truth. So, yes, you're right, that the theory of evolution doesn't necessarily provide us with True beliefs.

However, the theory of evolution is in place because evolution itself works. Of course, it doesn't know it's working, and doesn't have the means to make us believe it as the Truth... all it does is mutate, replicate DNA, blindly altering states, changes. To believe in such a thing isn't to believe in the Truth of what it is, because as humans, we don't have the necessary scope to say that all we know (at the moment) equates to the Truth. Perhaps we will never know the Truth of evolution. But does it matter? We have beliefs in the process and the of evolution because it is logically sound and provides answers and truths.

Just because, to us, evolution doesn't provide Truths, doesn't mean that isn't possible to believe in evolution as a truth that is continually progessing as we learn more about it. It doesn't defeat itself at all.