Beliefs, views, policies
Belief belief belief, but it’s not a “belief”; it’s reality.
Sure, it’s a “belief” in a silly narrow sense, but it’s not a “belief” in the sense of being tentative or contrary to fact. It’s not like a religious belief, because religious beliefs can be anything at all and are subject to no checks.
The BBC leans heavily on the b word:
The Green Party discriminated against former deputy leader Dr Shahrar Ali during a row over his gender critical beliefs, a court has ruled.
But “gender critical beliefs” aren’t beliefs as commonly understood. It’s not a “belief” to know that humans are not cats, it’s not a belief to know that turnips are not chainsaws, it’s not a belief to know that the Hawaiian islands are not in the Atlantic.
I know we have to talk about it that way now in order to defend our right to utter this “belief,” but it’s a crappy situation.
But the judgement upheld political parties’ right to dismiss spokespeople whose views differ from party policy.
…
The Chair of the Green Party of England and Wales’ executive, Jon Nott, said: We are pleased that the court has recognised that a democratic political party has the right to select those who speak for it on the basis that they can and will communicate and support party policy publicly.”
There again – it’s not a “view” and it’s not a “policy.” Trees are not horses; hammers are not marmalade; men are not women. Things are what they are and not something else.
But it’s *knowledge* if it’s a justified true belief based on facts, evidence, and reality. Believing that things are not the way they are is either fantasy, delusion or shitty epistemology (or a combination thereof).
Whereas ‘genner ideninny’ is a belief, one I had to politely complain about earlier today when I gave blood, and the Welsh Blood Service asked me to fill out a questionnaire including ye olde ‘what sex were you assigned at birth’ question. To be fair to the lady I mentioned this to, she showed me how to find the online post-donation survey to make comments. Also of course I didn’t expect her to comment herself while working:)
It occurred to me at the time that the NHS might be surprised how many patients would tick the box for an alternative question if only they were given the choice.
I think the word “mere”, as in mere belief, captures the distinction well enough. I believe that modus ponens is a valid rule of inference, but I don’t merely believe it–I also know it.
The fact that we believe the things we (think we) know is something I’ve had to explain before, because sets and subsets and supersets confuse people. Knowledge is a subset of belief, else we’d not believe the things we know and not believe our own words. Put this way, the idea generally gets through. At least in my experience.
If the court found it is okay for the party to dismiss party members on the basis of not supporting party policy, then I’m surprised that Ali won, since TRA policy is Greens policy (in Australia, a policy was put up going even further, that would ban even arguing for female sex based rights – and the numerous rights that flow from those such as LGB etc – or “asking questions that cover for” same, not sure if it passed though).
Of note is the fact the Greens policy in this area conflicts with present UK laws, which is perhaps why Ali won.
I think the confusion lies in failing to make the distinction between Belief (knowledge) and Belief (faith).
Knowledge depends on the existence of proof and the possibility of providing it, while Faith is not held to this standard. Since ‘trans women are women’ is not provable, and here again, if one is not asserting this under a delusion or fantasy (and thereby honestly believing to know it), and are only providing rationalizations, false equivalencies and such, then they are engaging in shitty epistemology — simply because it *can* be challenged and proven otherwise (even if this is disallowed by the keepers of the faith).
And what egotist doesn’t want their ontological status to be the same as God’s? :D Some beliefs have value and some don’t, and people who engage in shitty epistemology want us to think that faith and knowledge are the same thing. Some scientists even fail to make this simple distinction and claim knowledge, publicly in fact…