I have a minor quibble: actions demonstrate your *preference*, not your belief. Beliefs can be very complex, and two very different beliefs can take the same action. A simple example is when we observe that the wise man and the fool do the same thing. It's the midwit, with just enough knowledge to be dangerous, who gets wrapped around the axle and does something different. That being said, an action can be incompatible with a belief and can thus falsify the proposition that someone believes something, but only within a lot of assumptions, and a lot of things can be missed just because they are hard to articulate when one expresses one's beliefs.
Yes, still I am getting at interpretation of actions. Just today I saw a freakish social media video of a woman telling her woke friends to cut off family members who are recalcitrantly voting for Trump. She is judging these voters by their actions, their demonstrated *preference* for Trump, which she interprets as racist fascism and all the other horrible -isms. She thinks these actions demonstrates beliefs, when they actually demonstrate a preference, simply a preference for Trump over the other candidate. Various Trump voters have all sorts of reasons for voting for him, and all sorts of beliefs driving those reasons. You could vote for Trump over and over (long term) within all of these variations. The long-term choice shows that one prefers Trump over many others, but it gets no closer to uncovering a reason or belief.
Right, the same surface-level action can arise from more than one set of motivations. However, repeated, habitual actions demonstrate more than a shallow preference (even if an observer incorrectly guesses the underlying motivation, as likely happened with the freakish social media woman you described). At what point does a preference become evidence of something deeper and more fundamental, like a belief?
(and if you'd rather not respond this many times to some Random Guy From The Internet, just tell me to go away 🤣)
I agree, the pattern can be observed, but the actual belief that is causing the pattern can never be known with certainty without some mind-reading or sincere conversation. Even then, they could lie to you about their beliefs!
As I've also found, having conversations with intelligent people who are capable of sharper, deeper, broader seeking, will often cross traditional boundaries.
I have a minor quibble: actions demonstrate your *preference*, not your belief. Beliefs can be very complex, and two very different beliefs can take the same action. A simple example is when we observe that the wise man and the fool do the same thing. It's the midwit, with just enough knowledge to be dangerous, who gets wrapped around the axle and does something different. That being said, an action can be incompatible with a belief and can thus falsify the proposition that someone believes something, but only within a lot of assumptions, and a lot of things can be missed just because they are hard to articulate when one expresses one's beliefs.
Agreed. I meant to imply a long-term timescale.
I’m afraid actions are what really matter—you know what they say about good intentions
Good insight. Maybe it's not isolated actions, but cultivated habits -- regular, deliberate actions -- that show us something closer to beliefs.
Yes. I meant long term and sustained patterns of behavior.
Yes, still I am getting at interpretation of actions. Just today I saw a freakish social media video of a woman telling her woke friends to cut off family members who are recalcitrantly voting for Trump. She is judging these voters by their actions, their demonstrated *preference* for Trump, which she interprets as racist fascism and all the other horrible -isms. She thinks these actions demonstrates beliefs, when they actually demonstrate a preference, simply a preference for Trump over the other candidate. Various Trump voters have all sorts of reasons for voting for him, and all sorts of beliefs driving those reasons. You could vote for Trump over and over (long term) within all of these variations. The long-term choice shows that one prefers Trump over many others, but it gets no closer to uncovering a reason or belief.
Right, the same surface-level action can arise from more than one set of motivations. However, repeated, habitual actions demonstrate more than a shallow preference (even if an observer incorrectly guesses the underlying motivation, as likely happened with the freakish social media woman you described). At what point does a preference become evidence of something deeper and more fundamental, like a belief?
(and if you'd rather not respond this many times to some Random Guy From The Internet, just tell me to go away 🤣)
I agree, the pattern can be observed, but the actual belief that is causing the pattern can never be known with certainty without some mind-reading or sincere conversation. Even then, they could lie to you about their beliefs!
Thanks for the shoutout :-)
As I've also found, having conversations with intelligent people who are capable of sharper, deeper, broader seeking, will often cross traditional boundaries.
Amen, Brother. God Bless.