People’s belief in something is evidence for that thing in the sense that in
general it’s more likely for people to believe in a thing if it’s true. Less
Wrongers sometimes use the phrase “Bayesian evidence” when they want to
explicitly include this type of evidence that is excluded by other standards
of
evidence.
One way to think about this: Imagine that there are a bunch of parallel
universes, some of which have a flat Earth and some of which have a spherical
Earth, and you don’t know which type of universe you’re in. If you look around
and see that a bunch of people believe the Earth is flat, you should judge it
as more likely you’re in a flat-Earth universe than if you looked around and
saw few or no flat-Earthers.
However, people’s beliefs are often weak evidence that can be outweighed by
other evidence. The fact that many people believe in a god is evidence that
there is a god, but (I think) it’s outweighed by other evidence that there is
not a god.
Something to consider is that if you allow your beliefs to be influenced by the beliefs of others you are in danger of creating a feed back loop. When deciding what to believe based on what others believe you must rule out those who are simply following others as well
‘People’s belief in something is evidence for that thing in the sense that in general it’s more likely for people to believe in a thing if it’s true’. What’s the evidence for this statement?
The overwhelming majority of all human beliefs are (trivially) true. Things like “If I drop a rock, it will fall down”, “If I touch hot fire it will hurt”, etc. and “I am sitting down”, “I am typing on a keyboard”, etc.
The human brain has evolved to determine truths about the world around it, especially in cases where the knowledge directly affects survival chances (“Tiger is dangerous”), but also for cases where the knowledge could help indirectly (basically all human progress including first tool usage—achieved especially through curiosity and strive to find truth). It fails catastrophically in some cases, but most of the time it does an excellent job.
People’s belief in something is evidence for that thing in the sense that in general it’s more likely for people to believe in a thing if it’s true. Less Wrongers sometimes use the phrase “Bayesian evidence” when they want to explicitly include this type of evidence that is excluded by other standards of evidence.
One way to think about this: Imagine that there are a bunch of parallel universes, some of which have a flat Earth and some of which have a spherical Earth, and you don’t know which type of universe you’re in. If you look around and see that a bunch of people believe the Earth is flat, you should judge it as more likely you’re in a flat-Earth universe than if you looked around and saw few or no flat-Earthers.
However, people’s beliefs are often weak evidence that can be outweighed by other evidence. The fact that many people believe in a god is evidence that there is a god, but (I think) it’s outweighed by other evidence that there is not a god.
See also “Argument Screens off Authority”.
Something to consider is that if you allow your beliefs to be influenced by the beliefs of others you are in danger of creating a feed back loop. When deciding what to believe based on what others believe you must rule out those who are simply following others as well
‘People’s belief in something is evidence for that thing in the sense that in general it’s more likely for people to believe in a thing if it’s true’. What’s the evidence for this statement?
The overwhelming majority of all human beliefs are (trivially) true. Things like “If I drop a rock, it will fall down”, “If I touch hot fire it will hurt”, etc. and “I am sitting down”, “I am typing on a keyboard”, etc.
The human brain has evolved to determine truths about the world around it, especially in cases where the knowledge directly affects survival chances (“Tiger is dangerous”), but also for cases where the knowledge could help indirectly (basically all human progress including first tool usage—achieved especially through curiosity and strive to find truth). It fails catastrophically in some cases, but most of the time it does an excellent job.