Thread 40965069

So /x/ do you adhere to beliefs or to knowledge?

>>40965069 (OP)
Knowledge you fucktard. Don't listen to rabbis. All religions are evil alien psy ops to keep humanity as cattle for evil aliens.

>>40965134
>to keep humanity as cattle for evil aliens
That's a belief, you flaming gaytard.

>>40965069 (OP)
That depends, define belief?

>>40965134
Negligible iq
>>40965069 (OP)
False dichotomy. Your beliefs stem from your knowledge as it's processed through reasoning.

You can't follow basic data (knowledge) as a guide for how to act since it doesn't tell you any moral maxims. For example, knowing what the weather is outside is moot by itself, but using your reasoning, you come to a belief about what you should do given the weather outside.

Obviously, you can extrapolate this up to higher levels of abstraction. i.e. I see the jews constantly doing repugnant things regardless of circumstance, so my logical inference leads me to the belief that they're an evil subspecies of humans.

>>40965185
A belief is something you accept as true without solid evidence.
>Belief = unverified opinion. Knowledge = something you can show or demonstrate. Simple.

>>40965219
I think you're mixing two things: reasoning based on facts and conclusions biased by prejudice. Yes, our knowledge feeds our beliefs, but reasoning also involves testing our assumptions and remaining critical.

Your example about Jews is completely fallacious reasoning: you are drawing a monstrous generalization from limited cases and stereotypes. That's not logic, that's hatred. True logical inference does not work with insults or prejudices; it works with reliable and reproducible evidence.

>>40965134
Fascinating... so every religion is an alien manipulation, except the one you just made up in your head?

>>40965226
Almost there, laddy. It's just something you think or accept as being true or real.

It can be with or without evidence

>>40965254
You can make knowledge concrete. Let's take an example. You say, “God exists.” Okay? So that's a belief. Now you have to show it, prove it. Now let's say, “The sky is blue.” We can take 50 different cameras. We'll use a probe and connect it to the computer. Well, they'll tell us that in terms of colorimetry, it's not blue enough. Knowledge, belief.

>>40965241
Hatred is an emotion, not a byproduct or even tangentially related to my reasoning process. It's not involved in my logical conclusion at all.

I said earlier
>regardless of circumstance

This is what led me to believe that it's not environmental factors causing them to be evil, but possibly genetic factors since a jew is a jew from maternal lineage.

There have also been studies on some of their genomes being linked to schizophrenia and psychopathy genetically with correlation found between the two.

>>40965241
>there are distinct categories of observation separate from reason called "prejudice" and "insults" that you aren't allowed to appeal to
what a convenient moral framework for you. needing everyone to be blended together is a favorite camouflage technique of sociopaths.

what they do is engage in subversive behavior but then want to preemptively stop people from recognizing it by pretending every single instance must be judged on its own with no context of past behavior from that person/group that would protect you from the behavior
>this will help me get away with it longer

>hey every time Johnny comes over our food gets poisoned
>johnny: "lets all agree not to poison food, poisoning food is bad. YOU aren't poisoning food are you?"
>(the familiar pattern that is not ignored: "ANYTHING except me please")

>>40965297
>The guy claims to be able to logically prove that an entire ethnic group is genetically predisposed to “bad behavior.”
>There are several major scientific errors here.
>First, there is the fallacy of generalization.
>You can't take the traits of a few individuals and apply them to the entire population.
> Genetics does not dictate the morality or social behavior of an entire group.
> Next, correlation ≠ causation.
> Even if some studies find links between certain genes and psychiatric traits,
> that does not mean that all members of that ethnic group share them.
> Environment, culture, and social factors also play a role.
> Note also the selection bias of the studies.
>Many correlations disappear when the data is adjusted for age, socioeconomic status, and sampling methods.
>Finally, modern science: there is no “morality gene” specific to any religion or ethnicity.
>Your conclusions are invalid

>>40965305
>>40965344
>What you call “sociopathic camouflage” is actually a confusion between individual behavior and generalizations about an entire group.

Taking each individual on a case-by-case basis is not a technique for ignoring past behavior: it is the foundation of logic and rational ethics. Judging someone solely on their membership in a group leads to fallacious and unfair conclusions.

In your example of Johnny: if we assumed that everyone belonging to a certain group would poison the food, you would be falling into the trap of overgeneralization. Behavioral science and logic teach us that we must observe the actual actions of each individual in order to make a rational decision.

Prejudice and insults are never reliable substitutes for observation and reasoning. Ignoring this principle does not increase your safety; it just increases errors and injustices.

HERE OP
>Okay, let's get back to the heart of the conversation: knowledge vs. belief.

Knowledge is based on verifiable facts, evidence, and consistent logic. For example, knowing that water boils at 100°C at sea level is knowledge: it is reproducible and measurable.

A belief, on the other hand, is a personal conviction that may or may not be based on evidence. It often depends on individual experience, culture, education, or intuition. For example, believing that certain behaviors or groups are “intrinsically” bad without scientific evidence is a belief, not knowledge.

The key point: our beliefs can be influenced by our knowledge, but they are not the same thing. Good scientific and philosophical practice involves examining our beliefs in light of available knowledge and remaining open to revising them when new data emerges.

In other words, thinking critically means using knowledge to guide our beliefs, but never confusing the two. This allows us to distinguish between what we really know and what we assume or hope, and avoids unfair generalizations or judgments.

>>40965219
>Your beliefs stem from your knowledge as it's processed through reasoning.

you'd be surprised how much it's the other way around often

>>40965069 (OP)
>A rabbi once told me
why did you listen to a rabbi? I'm not gonna even read what you posted

>>40965608
A rabbi once told me to massively oppress a population for half a century, steal their land, kill their children for sport and when they finally decide to fight back just genocide them

Knowing is half the Battle!
(The other half is knifing the fucker)

>>40967611
Yes that's gaza/palestine

>>40965069 (OP)
always do the opposite of what the jews say

>>40967611
My rabbi says you're missing out a few imprtant parts

>>40965069 (OP)
Don't believe in yourself
Don't deceive with belief
Knowledge comes with death's release

>>40968929
yeah I left out all the rape in the israeli detention centers. Also sexual blackmail by the likes of epstein deserves a mention. Israel isn't a real country. It's a containment place for the worst psychopaths in existance. The US exports them there to have a forward base in the middle east and to be rid of them. Two birds, one stone

Knowledge without belief is a curse.

Knowledge IS belief. Nothing more.

>>40968914
That's a good rule of thumb.

God loves the Jews, that's why he gives them wisdom.

>>40965069 (OP)
Jews cant cook on sabbath, so to make tea they pour hot water into one cup, then directly into another cup with their tea packet.
You see by not pouring it from pot to cup it's not considered cooking, and cup to cup is just transferring liquids.
Tricking God is easy when you are jewish.
>taking advice from jews.

>>40971526
here OP I'm not even Jewish.
It doesn't matter whether the advice comes from a Jew or not. What you have to look at is whether the advice is good or not, and this is exactly the case. But when he told me that, it made an impression on me and opened my mind, a good four or five years ago. I listen to everything, I don't limit myself to certain political movements: I can listen to Muslims for Hamas, neo-Nazis... I listen to a little bit of everything, as long as the advice is good.

>>40965069 (OP)
from GPT-4o mini:

## Difference Between Belief and Knowledge

Belief and knowledge are two fundamental concepts in philosophy and epistemology, but they differ significantly in their definitions and implications.

### Definitions

- **Belief**: A belief is an acceptance that something is true or exists, often without requiring proof or evidence. Beliefs can be subjective and vary from person to person. They can be based on personal experiences, emotions, or cultural influences.

- **Knowledge**: Knowledge is typically defined as justified true belief. It involves not only believing something to be true but also having evidence or justification for that belief. Knowledge is often considered more objective and is usually based on facts, data, or reliable sources.

### Key Differences

| Aspect | Belief | Knowledge |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| **Nature** | Subjective and personal | Objective and verifiable |
| **Evidence** | May lack evidence or justification | Requires evidence or justification |
| **Truth** | Can be true or false | Must be true to be considered knowledge |
| **Changeability**| Can change easily based on new information | More stable, though it can evolve with new evidence |
| **Examples** | Believing in a particular religion | Knowing that water boils at 100°C at sea level |

### Conclusion

In summary, while both belief and knowledge involve acceptance of ideas, knowledge is grounded in truth and justification, making it a more reliable form of understanding. Beliefs can be deeply personal and may not always align with objective reality.

>>40965069 (OP)
I've adopted a hybrid approach. It's tricky to to maintain at times, but I'm getting better at it. I adhere to other things as well.