Q&A: Arbitrary Belief in Any Area
Arbitrary Belief in Any Area
Question
I claim that arbitrary belief is stronger than any understanding, especially in a situation where the person who holds it believes in it 100%.
Its strength is measured דווקא by the fact that it cannot be refuted, and if you like, not proven either.
The problem begins when there is no correspondence between it and reality, and that can happen only with belief.
Understanding, by contrast, is never certain, but many times you can check it against reality.
Therefore there is an illusion that understanding is stronger. And in general, before any logical discussion, one assumes quite arbitrarily
that the laws of logic are correct. That too is belief in the laws of logic, and here too one can believe to different degrees.
Only afterward comes understanding. In any case, if the source is arbitrary, then all the conclusions are matters of belief.
In such a situation there really is no difference between arbitrary belief and belief in the laws of logic/intellect. True, in the final analysis what matters is who is right and who is wrong, but the question is with what feeling of certainty a person chooses to live. It is possible for the intellect to strengthen belief, and also the other way around. What do you think about all this?
Answer
If the claim is psychological, I am not especially interested in it. Philosophically, “arbitrary belief” is an oxymoron. If you also agree that it is arbitrary, then you do not believe in it.
Discussion on Answer
I mean: I believe because I believe. Maybe in an unconscious way I understand that this is so. I don’t know.
Maybe you mean intuition. Search here on the site for intuition.
The question is whether you aren’t confusing / turning around the different domains. For example, when you say “I feel” = does it really come from the system of feeling and not understanding, and so on? And when you say “I think” = is that really thought? And when you say “understanding” = does it indeed come from the system of understanding? I understand that in your view belief and understanding are the same thing.
And in your opinion, are thought and speech the same thing?
It could be intuition. I’ll check.
Is there an intuition that is basically a kind of inner knowledge, firm and unmoving?
And also, what does it mean that the Sages said not to look for proofs for faith? Because for every proof, one day you can find a better proof. And therefore they recommended simply believing. What do you think?
Ask yourself whether you find such a thing. For me, nothing is completely certain, except logic.
As far as I remember, the Sages did not say this, nor anything close to it.
I mean blind belief, and not necessarily in God, one that begins and ends with belief. Not that its content is arbitrary.
I think belief is a choice, even if usually it is an unconscious choice.
For example, when you meet someone on the street, ask his name, and he answers, Avi. If you bought that, it means you believe it; if not, then not. And I don’t mean a situation where you say it’s reasonable that he isn’t lying, because that isn’t belief, that’s an assumption.