No I’m not. I am not interested in academic study. I am interested in real world application. I am aware of justified true belief and that most people don’t apply it. My curiosity is in how people acnually think about the concept.

That is like the home owner’s application of the scientific method: test the hypothesis until you decide it is a pretty solid system

Your description makes belief sound like willful ignorance.

It sounds like the real challenge is knowing when you have enough information to convert your educated guess into full-blown knowledge

What about the ideas that can be neither confirmed nor denied like the existence of extraterrestrial life or a machine of 100% efficiency?

What if you should have some doubt (belief) but due to ignorance or hubris do not and so you elevate a concept to ‘knowledge’ that should not rightfully be there? I’m not trying to be argumentative, I’m genuinely curious about that gray area of misplaced confidence.

So, if we haven’t studied the underlying axioms or foundation of a conclusion, we cannot have knowledge of it? That seems to imply the only things we have knowledge of are the things we have invested significant time and energy into. It’s that correct?

If so much is contextual, is there no knowledge based on truth or fact?

So the stronger the feeling of identifying with a concept, the stronger the belief that it is true?

I predicted in about 10 years disclaimers at the beginning will include, ‘This show depicts murder. Neither the show’s creators producers or actors condone the taking of another human life.’

What if the claim were false?

What if she wasn’t from Pitcairn? No big deal other than her credibility comes into question.

What if Gengis Kahn did not exist? Nothing lost, we already doubt our historical record.

What if Jesus did not exist? Suddenly the largest religion’s foundation is gone.

What if God doesn’t exist? Many people lose their reason for existing…

That which has enormous impact should require proof of truthfulness.

I dislike Trump as much as the next sane, intelligent human, but context matters. The ways specifically talking about going to NBC and running a show. And there, yes, ratings are all that matters.

This is not news. This is a one-sided venting without context or any other perspective on the situation.

With God’s blessing.

I agree

First they would have to carry the head to the coast which is no easy task without a Toyota. You make it sound like crossing the Mediterranean is easy but storms are frequent and problematic. The ancient Israelites were not known for their seafaring prowess. In fact, they once got lost in the desert for 40 fucking years, so their ability to navigate by the stars is doubtful. Once they arrived in Italy, then, they would have had to cart that monstrosity hundreds of miles to Rome. And remember, this was before all road led there so, even more difficult. Finally, one should ask themselves why they would bother.

Also curious as to how it ended up it central Italy.

The Personal Confusion Fallacy or Personal Incredulously Fallacy - if I don’t understand it, it must be false.

From the article - they believe eating fast food should be cheaper than eating at home, but isn’t. What kind of fucked up belief is this? No wonder they view fast food as a luxury.