Analyzing Velleman and Moran’s Thoughts
According to Velleman (1989), there exists a kind of belief through which people can create the truth. The philosopher argues that choice aims at the truth, and belief is controlled by the objective of perceiving something as factual only if it is factual. On the other hand, assuming and imagining involves accepting a suggestion hypothetically without the objective of getting the truth. Further, Velleman (1989) argues that resolving a question in the mind requires it to be resolved in the mind. Choice, therefore, possesses a similar direction of fit as belief, but a similar direction of guidance as desire, making it a case of practical cognition. On his part, Moran (2012) believes that there is a manner …show more content…
The philosopher argues that there are two ways of accepting something from such a perspective. The first way is accepting something as a reflection of the truth and accepting to create the truth (Velleman, 1989, p. 25). When people accept something to reflect the truth, they hold a theoretical belief. On the other hand, people hold a self-fulfilling belief when they accept something to create the truth. It is by the benefit of holding a belief that it becomes true to a person.
My personal perspective on practical belief differs from that of Velleman. The relevant beliefs should not be perceived as self-fulfilling. It is the practical objective of doing something that makes belief rational as opposed to the practical reasons for believing. Practical beliefs are restricted to issues that are up to individuals. People can possess practical beliefs only when they are in a position to make them true. When individuals create practical beliefs, they do not do so because they want to believe something or because it is beneficial to believe. Practical belief is not dependent on the …show more content…
For example, when criminals are accused of a crime, they may not explain the reason for their action. Nonetheless, the law enforcers consider the circumstances under which the crime was committed. The motives are also established and form the most significant part of the deliberations before the murder. As such, it would be correct for Velleman (1989) to insinuate that the deliberations of motives and circumstances reflect the reasons for
According to Velleman (1989), there exists a kind of belief through which people can create the truth. The philosopher argues that choice aims at the truth, and belief is controlled by the objective of perceiving something as factual only if it is factual. On the other hand, assuming and imagining involves accepting a suggestion hypothetically without the objective of getting the truth. Further, Velleman (1989) argues that resolving a question in the mind requires it to be resolved in the mind. Choice, therefore, possesses a similar direction of fit as belief, but a similar direction of guidance as desire, making it a case of practical cognition. On his part, Moran (2012) believes that there is a manner …show more content…
The philosopher argues that there are two ways of accepting something from such a perspective. The first way is accepting something as a reflection of the truth and accepting to create the truth (Velleman, 1989, p. 25). When people accept something to reflect the truth, they hold a theoretical belief. On the other hand, people hold a self-fulfilling belief when they accept something to create the truth. It is by the benefit of holding a belief that it becomes true to a person.
My personal perspective on practical belief differs from that of Velleman. The relevant beliefs should not be perceived as self-fulfilling. It is the practical objective of doing something that makes belief rational as opposed to the practical reasons for believing. Practical beliefs are restricted to issues that are up to individuals. People can possess practical beliefs only when they are in a position to make them true. When individuals create practical beliefs, they do not do so because they want to believe something or because it is beneficial to believe. Practical belief is not dependent on the …show more content…
For example, when criminals are accused of a crime, they may not explain the reason for their action. Nonetheless, the law enforcers consider the circumstances under which the crime was committed. The motives are also established and form the most significant part of the deliberations before the murder. As such, it would be correct for Velleman (1989) to insinuate that the deliberations of motives and circumstances reflect the reasons for