“‘In general, beliefs require evidence.’
In general? Which beliefs don’t?”
This is a language problem. “In general” or “generally” to a scientist/mathematician/engineer means “always,” whereas in everyday speech it means “sometimes.”
For example I could tell you that a fence with 2 sections has 3 posts ( I=I=I ), or I could tell you that “in general” a fence with N sections has N+1 posts.
“In general” does not mean “always”, it means “by default”. It is not the same thing. Rectangles, in general, do not have equal sides with a common dot—except the squares which do. However, there must be reasons for excluding something from a default—and a random false belief is unlikely to find such reasons (not to mention the very going from belief to finding such reasons is backwards).
“‘In general, beliefs require evidence.’ In general? Which beliefs don’t?”
This is a language problem. “In general” or “generally” to a scientist/mathematician/engineer means “always,” whereas in everyday speech it means “sometimes.”
For example I could tell you that a fence with 2 sections has 3 posts ( I=I=I ), or I could tell you that “in general” a fence with N sections has N+1 posts.
Where N >= 3 the fence can (and often does) have N posts.
Ya, if it wraps in on itself, for sure.
Or if the farmer uses a tree instead. ;)
“How many posts does a fence have, if you call the tree a post?”
“In general” does not mean “always”, it means “by default”. It is not the same thing. Rectangles, in general, do not have equal sides with a common dot—except the squares which do. However, there must be reasons for excluding something from a default—and a random false belief is unlikely to find such reasons (not to mention the very going from belief to finding such reasons is backwards).