From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Subject: Re: Having to believe
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:06:32 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


In article <memo.533140@cix.compulink.co.uk>, shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk (Leo Smith) writes:
|> 

	[Stegmuller stuff deleted.]

|> I have never seen that put better. In one glorious paragraph
|> Stegmuller has illustrated that there is no absolute standpoint: It
|> is _always_ a matter of personal choice. It is a choice whether one
|> believes or does not.

Just a passing comment on this.  I find it interesting that Leo has
such a reaction to Stegmuller, given his original (and some subsequent)
comments re Quine.  In fact, the same view is to be found in Quine
(ontological relativity, dogmas of empiricism, naturalized epistemology,
and all that), and I think Stegmuller would be among the first to
concede a debt to Quine.  Quine also seems to think highly of Stegmuller,
as vide his remarks in his autobiography.

|> There is also a further implication. This is what Castaneda referred
|> to as 'having to believe'. I think that a more acceptable way to
|> phrase that in this group would be to say that it is a necessary
|> precondition of all human rational activity, that for the purposes of
|> that activity at least, certain pre-rational assumptions are made.

This is in fact a very old, and oft-repeated, observation.  I suppose
it bears repeating from time to time.  If we do not share at least
*some* pre-rational assumptions then, as Plato observed, communication
is impossible.  To a significant extent, philosophy is the process of
identifying the pre-rational assumptions and working out their
consequences.

|> 
|> e.g. In order to 'do Science' a necessary precondition is the
|> assumption of some separate and observable reality.

This is also a precondition for simply continuing to live.  Those
who fail to make it end up with severely shortened lifespans.  There
is in fact a strong force of natural selection on those who adopt
the wrong (okay, *a* wrong) epistemology.

|> What Stegmuller seems to me to be saying - and I so agree - is that
|> this assumption can never be proved: It can only be shown to be
|> effective.
|> 
|> The real question for me is what is the effect of carrying over this
|> assumption into HUMAN ACTIVITY THAT IS NOT SCIENCE. It seems to me
|> that this assumption is being applied far beyond the context in which
|> it is effective, because it seems that we are uncomfortable with a
|> 'multi-valued' reality. So on the one hand we have the realists
|> saying 'It must be real, because it works' and the New Agers saying
|> 'But you have no rational justification for it, so we can choose
|> any model we want'.

I'm not sure what the multi-valued reality stuff is, nor what other
contexts you have in mind where this assumption fails.  I have a vague
feeling that what is lurking behind these questions is old phenomena/
noumena or observation-statement/theoretical-statement distinction
together with the usual non-uniqueness problem in saving the phenomena.
Anything else?

|> 
|> In conclusion: although we 'have to believe' in order to act...is it
|> valid and/or effective to suspend belief at the cessation of the
|> action? Can a man believe in material reality in the working day, as
|> he designs a mechanical structure, yet see it all as Maya as he
|> meditates, and be considered a rational and consistent man, or is he
|> condemned to be considered a hypocrite and inconstant, because he
|> varies his beliefs according to his purpose?

The latter if one is a metaphysical realist, the former if an anti-realist.
Some have attempted to make a distinction between *believing* a theory
(or *accepting* the theory) and believing the theory to be *true*.  And
then there is Quine's view of the "web of belief" in which some beliefs
are more central than others, but non can claim absolute supremacy
(contra the positivists observation-statement as the foundation of
knowledge).


-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm