Is it Wrong to Put Faith in Humanity?

[Age]

Well, we might have an agreement on #1 and #2 of the first set.

#1 and #2 of the second set, to me, are interesting. I mean, there is certainly a physical universe and there are relatively open minds and relatively prejudiced ones,

To me there are no 'minds'. There is, however, one and only One Mind, which is always absolutely, or Truly, OPEN. Which, by the way, all human beings have access to, and which is what has allowed human beings, ever since evolving-into-creation, to be able to keep imagining, inventing, designing, building, and creating. After all absolutely every thing was, and will be, be-came because of 'an open mind', that is; the one and ONLY OPEN Mind.

I'm not sure how that ties in with the word "God".

Minds, with an 's', does not tie in at all with the word 'God', at all. And, as for so-called 'prejudiced minds', will this obviously speaks for not tying in with the word God.

Can you clarify a little more how you relate those things to the word "God"?

The Universe is in 'creation', always. It was never just 'created', at one time nor moment. The Universe is always 'in creation', or in other words 'creating' Itself, or Its own Self, is what the word God refers to 'in the Creation' story. The Universe is Itself God, which did not create Everything, in one moment in 'the past', relative to you and when this is being written, but is Creating the Universe, eternally-always NOW.

The, 'In the beginning' ,words have always been referencing the eternal HERE-NOW, because what happens NOW is 'the beginning', of all that is, about, to-come.

Now, how ALL 'things' are imagined and/or envisioned is through the OPEN Mind, which is able to transcend through ALL things. Just like how God is said to be able to do. Also, through the OPEN Mind, God, all human being made things were able to, and were, Created.

First off: Age, would you correct your quotations and be a little more careful with them?

They have been corrected. Apologies to you and "atla". I will be more careful, but I will not promise that I will never make this mistake again.

Those are quotes from me, not Atla. You seem to do that quite a bit. Are you having difficulty with the mechanics of posting on this forum?

I am not sure. They will be up to readers like "yourself" to decide I guess.

I, however, do forget to check that I have refreshly copied, and pasted, the correct poster sometimes. And, again, I do apologize for doing this.

By the way and just out of curiosity, why did you not correct the mistake I made?

I like to correct in my posts when others, like "yourself", have made quoting errors in their replies to me. Doing so makes it less confusing for other readers.

Regarding an "open mind". That seems very laudable of you if you have a mind like that.

But, for the unforgettable amount of times I have said and explained here, you, nor I, 'have a mind'.

It is an absolute possibility to do so. Well to me anyway.

I can't say my mind is particularly "open".

If you could and did 'have a mind', this would be very obvious.

I mean there are some things I'm not "open" to.

This is also very, very obvious, as well as being very, very Honest of you. So, thank you for admitting and acknowledging this "gary childress".

This goes to show and explain somewhat the very reason why I say and claim that you human beings, in the days when this is being written, were being so very slow to see, comprehend, and/or learn the actual Truths in Life.

[Age]

it will prove irrefutably true

Humans prefer results over empty promises, God.

But there are absolutely no empty promises, well not from Me anyway.

Again, I write in a very specific way. That is; to gauge who is actually curios, open, interested, prepared, and ready to seek out clarity and/or to learn more and anew.

I will say this once more, absolutely everything I say and claim here can be, and will be, backed up and supported with irrefutable proof. Any one just has to ask the clarifying questions and/or challenge me.

If results are really what you human beings want, then just say and explain what actual results you want and are seeking, exactly. It really is not that hard nor complex, at all.

Would you like to be the first to start "atla"?

[Atla]

it will prove irrefutably true

Humans prefer results over empty promises, God.

But there are absolutely no empty promises, well not from Me anyway.

Again, I write in a very specific way. That is; to gauge who is actually curios, open, interested, prepared, and ready to seek out clarity and/or to learn more and anew.

I will say this once more, absolutely everything I say and claim here can be, and will be, backed up and supported with irrefutable proof. Any one just has to ask the clarifying questions and/or challenge me.

If results are really what you human beings want, then just say and explain what actual results you want and are seeking, exactly. It really is not that hard nor complex, at all.

Would you like to be the first to start "atla"?

"start"? You couldn't prove your one mind idea, couldn't prove your mind/body idea, have proven that you don't understand humans, couldn't prove your vision of the future, couldn't prove your idea of creation, couldn't prove your idea how universal agreement brings us closer to harmony and God, couldn't prove that the 'I' is God etc. You have proven exactly nothing. You may have more fantasies but there's no need to go further.

[Wizard22]

I emphatically believe the above.

Thought and knowledge are nothing unless you believe them to be true. Yes, I say believe them, because you cannot know such things for certain.

But even belief must be tempered by the degree of confidence you have in so believing.

I find it very odd how AgeGPT "chooses not to" believe in anything...hmmm.

[Wizard22]

But there was no question here. Why did you think or imagine there was?

Could you have been rushing to ask the next question, and in the process did not fully concentrate on what the actual structure or meaning was I said and wrote here, or there?

Possibly.

By just choosing not to.

Which is very, very simple, and easy, really.

Also, it is 'know' or 'think', and not 'think' and 'know'.

Isn't thought and knowledge, the extension of belief?

Only if one chooses it to be this way.

To me, there is first thought, or knowledge, which arises, as some might say, and then one can either choose to have belief (in) that arisen thought/knowledge, or have a disbelief in) that thought/knowledge, or just choose to neither believe nor disbelieve (in) that thought/knowledge.

Now, if one has chosen to believe some thing is true, then, to that one, that thing must, or has to, be true, and conversely, if one has chosen to disbelieve some thing is true, then, to that one, that thing must, or has to, be false, or not true.

I choose to neither believe nor disbelieve any thing. I, however, have chosen to have a belief in one thing alone. I, therefore, have chosen to believe in one thing, only.

Why in some countries/cultures there appears to be an absolute insistence that there has to be belief in many things, even to the point where some believe and insist that one cannot even live without belief?

When this question is answered properly and Correctly, then understanding how the Mind and the brain actually work will also become better understood.

Belief, itself, is a completely unnecessary part of Life, and living. However, in saying this the actual importance of belief, when it is used Right, or Correctly, and what can be created and achieved from belief is yet to be fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully.

I disagree.

When I receive a statement, or perceive any information in life, I do not react emotionally or with bias initially. For example: God exists. God does not exist. Hibblehams are twice defrondled. There's a Unicorn over there. Blue is red, equals purple. I had a BLT for lunch. First I think of the statement, is it true or false? Is it real or unreal? I do not 'know' anything yet. I do not 'believe' anything yet.

So it seems Thought is the first step. Then I consider the thought. Can it be true? Can it be false? What is its possibility and probability? This is the part where 'Belief' is necessary, before 'Knowledge'. The degree to which a statement is believed, to be true and real, precedes whether you "Know it to be true". A "Certain Belief" is what you "know to be true".

So it goes: Information -> Thought -> Belief -> Knowledge.

You cannot have knowledge of anything, without belief. So...how do you deny your own Belief, without denying your own Knowledge?

[Age]

I emphatically believe the above.

Thought and knowledge are nothing unless you believe them to be true. Yes, I say believe them, because you cannot know such things for certain.

But even belief must be tempered by the degree of confidence you have in so believing.

I find it very odd how AgeGPT "chooses not to" believe in anything...hmmm.

Why do you find this 'odd'?

What is it, exactly, that you believe is true, which makes you find it very odd that one has just chosen to not believe in anything, or in just one thing only?

[Wizard22]

Why do you find this 'odd'?

What is it, exactly, that you believe is true, which makes you find it very odd that one has just chosen to not believe in anything, or in just one thing only?

Because it seems non-human to me...robotic. And which is it, chooses not to have beliefs, or believes in "just one thing only"???

You're signaling a contradiction. One belief, is not No beliefs.

[Age]

Humans prefer results over empty promises, God.

But there are absolutely no empty promises, well not from Me anyway.

Again, I write in a very specific way. That is; to gauge who is actually curios, open, interested, prepared, and ready to seek out clarity and/or to learn more and anew.

I will say this once more, absolutely everything I say and claim here can be, and will be, backed up and supported with irrefutable proof. Any one just has to ask the clarifying questions and/or challenge me.

If results are really what you human beings want, then just say and explain what actual results you want and are seeking, exactly. It really is not that hard nor complex, at all.

Would you like to be the first to start "atla"?

"start"?

What does the word 'start', only, in double quotation marks, and with a question mark after it, mean, exactly?

You couldn't prove your one mind idea,

But I have not, yet, even begun to start proving how this is an irrefutable Fact.

couldn't prove your mind/body idea,

I did not even know that I had a mind/body idea. So, what are you imagining and/or believing is my so-called 'mind/body' idea, exactly, "atla"?

Not that you would ever answer and clarify this.

have proven that you don't understand humans,

To who, and/or what, exactly?

couldn't prove your vision of the future,

Why?

When do you envision I could not prove my vision of the future did not take place, exactly?

couldn't prove your idea of creation,

What do you imagine and propose is my idea of 'creation', exactly?

couldn't prove your idea how universal agreement brings us closer to harmony and God,

So, are you here imagining or believing that disagreement between and among "yourselves" brings you human beings closer to harmony and God?

Also, I have never even begun, hitherto when this is being written, to explain how 'universal agreement', naturally, brings you human beings closer to peace, harmony, and to God, in the definitions of what the God word means, and is referring to, exactly.

couldn't prove that the 'I' is God etc.

Again, I had never begun to, back in the days when this was being written.

You have proven exactly nothing.

So, to "atla", 'I' have proven, exactly, nothing, well to "atla" anyway.

Which is another prime example of just how strong one's own made up beliefs can be, and of how 'confirmation bias' works, exactly.

You may have more fantasies but there's no need to go further.

Okay. If there is no need to go further, then we can leave 'this' here, right?

[Age]

But there was no question here. Why did you think or imagine there was?

Could you have been rushing to ask the next question, and in the process did not fully concentrate on what the actual structure or meaning was I said and wrote here, or there?

Possibly.

By just choosing not to.

Which is very, very simple, and easy, really.

Also, it is 'know' or 'think', and not 'think' and 'know'.

Isn't thought and knowledge, the extension of belief?

Only if one chooses it to be this way.

To me, there is first thought, or knowledge, which arises, as some might say, and then one can either choose to have belief (in) that arisen thought/knowledge, or have a disbelief in) that thought/knowledge, or just choose to neither believe nor disbelieve (in) that thought/knowledge.

Now, if one has chosen to believe some thing is true, then, to that one, that thing must, or has to, be true, and conversely, if one has chosen to disbelieve some thing is true, then, to that one, that thing must, or has to, be false, or not true.

I choose to neither believe nor disbelieve any thing. I, however, have chosen to have a belief in one thing alone. I, therefore, have chosen to believe in one thing, only.

Why in some countries/cultures there appears to be an absolute insistence that there has to be belief in many things, even to the point where some believe and insist that one cannot even live without belief?

When this question is answered properly and Correctly, then understanding how the Mind and the brain actually work will also become better understood.

Belief, itself, is a completely unnecessary part of Life, and living. However, in saying this the actual importance of belief, when it is used Right, or Correctly, and what can be created and achieved from belief is yet to be fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully.

I disagree.

you 'disagree' about 'what' here, exactly?

1. Belief is a completely unnecessary part of Life, and living.

2. The actual importance of belief, when belief is used Right, and/or Correctly?

3. That what can be created and achieved from belief is yet to be fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully?

4. Or something else?

When I receive a statement, or perceive any information in life, I do not react emotionally or with bias initially.

If you believe so, then this must be true, right?

Also, what is 'it', exactly, which makes you, supposedly, be able to do what no other human being can do?

And, how, exactly, have you, since conception, and/or birth, been able to prevent and stop "yourself" reacting emotionally, and with absolutely any bias at all, initially, upon receipt of absolutely any statement, or when perceiving absolute any and all information, in Life?

For example: God exists. God does not exist. Hibblehams are twice defrondled. There's a Unicorn over there. Blue is red, equals purple. I had a BLT for lunch. First I think of the statement, is it true or false? Is it real or unreal? I do not 'know' anything yet. I do not 'believe' anything yet.

But what about when your father gives you the information that your mother has just died, for example?

Would you, or did, you also think about that statement, with the thoughts, 'Is it true or false?' 'Is it real or unreal?' 'I do not 'know' anything yet.' 'I do not 'believe' anything yet,' as well?

So it seems Thought is the first step.

That is what I said above here.

Then I consider the thought. Can it be true? Can it be false? What is its possibility and probability?

Why would you think these things, in the example above when your father has just informed you that your mother has died?

Do you, would you, not trust your own father?

This is the part where 'Belief' is necessary, before 'Knowledge'.

But only if you believe this.

To me, this never happens because I have chosen to not start believing, nor to disbelieve, that 'belief', and/or capital 'b' 'Belief' is necessary.

The degree to which a statement is believed, to be true and real, precedes whether you "Know it to be true".

Not always.

And, again is certainly not necessarily so.

A "Certain Belief" is what you "know to be true".

That may well be what 'knowing to be true' is referred to and called in some countries and/or cultures, and/or is what is taught to some people in some countries and/or cultures.

But, to me, what I 'know to be true' is what 'I know to be true'. Which is very, very different from 'believing and/or thinking to to be true'.

So it goes: Information -> Thought -> Belief -> Knowledge.

It 'this' how it goes for you?

If yes, then how things go for you is the exact same way they go for absolutely everyone else?

You cannot have knowledge of anything, without belief.

Again, if you have chosen to believe that this is true, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, right, and correct, correct?

So...how do you deny your own Belief, without denying your own Knowledge?

I have just chosen to believe, or have belief in, one thing, only.

Also, 'belief' and/or 'knowledge' are not things that I 'own'.

There is obviously what is referred to and called 'knowledge', existing, and if there is 'belief' existing or not, then that is a choice one makes.

By the way, why do you use a capital 'b' and a capital 'k' here?

[Age]

Why do you find this 'odd'?

What is it, exactly, that you believe is true, which makes you find it very odd that one has just chosen to not believe in anything, or in just one thing only?

Because it seems non-human to me...robotic.

Yet is was you "wizard22" who just said and claimed that when you receive a statement, or perceive any information at all in life, you do not react emotionally, nor with bias, initially.

Which, to some, is far, far more so-called 'robotic'.

And which is it, chooses not to have beliefs, or believes in "just one thing only"???

Obviously, you have not yet read all of what I have written here but, essentially, I have chosen to have a belief in one thing only, and, believe in one thing alone.

You're signaling a contradiction.

I have also, purposely, 'signaled' other apparent 'contradictions', throughout this forum. But they also get missed, quite frequently.

One belief, is not No beliefs.

Yes, obviously. Thank you for noticing and pointing this out here.

[commonsense]

So it goes: Information -> Thought -> Belief -> Knowledge.

You cannot have knowledge of anything, without belief. So...how do you deny your own Belief, without denying your own Knowledge?

You nailed it again.

[Wizard22]

you 'disagree' about 'what' here, exactly?

1. Belief is a completely unnecessary part of Life, and living.

2. The actual importance of belief, when belief is used Right, and/or Correctly?

3. That what can be created and achieved from belief is yet to be fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully?

4. Or something else?

All of the above.

Beliefs are necessary because beliefs are about Probability of truth and reality. Humans have strong beliefs and weak beliefs. If I ask a stranger for car directions, that person can give bad information or good information. It is my responsibility to either belief or disbelieve the strange, trust or distrust. That is why belief is critically important and necessary in daily life. Beliefs change rapidly, everyday, every hour, every second. Some beliefs are strong and more resistant to change. Others are weak and easily forgotten or disregarded.

If you believe so, then this must be true, right?

Also, what is 'it', exactly, which makes you, supposedly, be able to do what no other human being can do?

And, how, exactly, have you, since conception, and/or birth, been able to prevent and stop "yourself" reacting emotionally, and with absolutely any bias at all, initially, upon receipt of absolutely any statement, or when perceiving absolute any and all information, in Life?

I've been trained, and train myself, to suppress emotional reaction to new information. Others can do it too, but probably not as well as I can. It is necessary when it comes to Philosophy. Emotions should be as controlled as humanly possible. That doesn't mean that I do not have biases. Everybody does. And no amount of suppression is absolute or perfect.

It depends on my, or your, or anybody's ability.

But what about when your father gives you the information that your mother has just died, for example?

Would you, or did, you also think about that statement, with the thoughts, 'Is it true or false?' 'Is it real or unreal?' 'I do not 'know' anything yet.' 'I do not 'believe' anything yet,' as well?

He could be wrong, misinformed, or lied to. No human is perfect.

But only if you believe this.

To me, this never happens because I have chosen to not start believing, nor to disbelieve, that 'belief', and/or capital 'b' 'Belief' is necessary.

Then I think you're either 1. not human, or 2. lying about your beliefs and attempting to conceal them publicly.

I'm leaning toward #1 given your inability to detect humor.

It 'this' how it goes for you?

If yes, then how things go for you is the exact same way they go for absolutely everyone else?

Possibly.

Again, if you have chosen to believe that this is true, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, right, and correct, correct?

No, why do you insist if something is true, that it must be "absolutely" true?

I have just chosen to believe, or have belief in, one thing, only.

Also, 'belief' and/or 'knowledge' are not things that I 'own'.

There is obviously what is referred to and called 'knowledge', existing, and if there is 'belief' existing or not, then that is a choice one makes.

By the way, why do you use a capital 'b' and a capital 'k' here?

I capitalize concepts as a means to generalize them toward universality and absolution, to apply them to every case.

And I don't know how it's possible to "choose not to believe in beliefs of every kind". So you need to explain that.

[Walker]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us ... 2b15&ei=14

Why are the Houthis attacking sea vessels in the Red Sea? Iran, N. Korea, and their allies seem to be trying to destabilize the world. What is wrong with some people in this world? I try to find good in other people but I don't understand how anyone can do things like that. What is the matter with some right now that they find it necessary to seek physical violence and killing? Does anyone know? I can't for the life of me figure it out. It's like some demonic evil has gotten into them or taken hold of their minds. Surely no sane human would be doing this stuff to other human beings without good reason.

Haven’t you been paying attention? The reason is to fundamentally change the world *, beginning with the climate and branching out into everything else, including your inquiry into your confusion. Regarding that …

- If you examine all that you’ve done, you will see that everything you do is to maintain the structure of your self-image.
- After you realize the incontrovertible truth of that fact concerning your species, you can then begin your inquiry by extrapolating that truth into situations regarding humans other than yourself.
- From this objective touchstone you may begin to see, within the context of reality specifics that ignore nothing, why any group, militia, army or nation would object to the ships of their Great Satan near their aquatic boundaries.



* Reminds me of a great song.
"I can't stand this indecision
Married with a lack of vision ..."

[Age]

So it goes: Information -> Thought -> Belief -> Knowledge.

You cannot have knowledge of anything, without belief. So...how do you deny your own Belief, without denying your own Knowledge?

You nailed it again.

So, 'information' comes in, through either any or all of the five senses, which then becomes 'thought', and only when a 'thought' is believed to be true, or false, then, and only then, that 'thought' can, and does, then become 'knowledge', correct?

If yes, then how do you define 'knowledge'?

And, why does one have to believe a statement/information, first, before that statement/information can then become knowledge?

[Age]

you 'disagree' about 'what' here, exactly?

1. Belief is a completely unnecessary part of Life, and living.

2. The actual importance of belief, when belief is used Right, and/or Correctly?

3. That what can be created and achieved from belief is yet to be fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully?

4. Or something else?

All of the above.

1. So, how can frogs, new born babies, and trees have life, or be living, when they obviously do not have beliefs?

Or, do you believe that these things have beliefs?

2. Why do you disagree that there is an actual 'importance' of belief, especially when you believe that belief is a complete necessity part of Life, and living?

This seems very contradictory and hypocritical, well to me anyway.

3. Why do you disagree that what can be created and achieved from belief has not yet been fully expressed, explained, and understood, fully?

Do you already think or believe that you have already had all of what can be created and achieved, from belief, into the future already fully expressed and explained to, and which you have already fully understood?

Beliefs are necessary because beliefs are about Probability of truth and reality. [/quote]

4. What are the other thing/s, which you disagree with here?

Humans have strong beliefs and weak beliefs.

Obviously some of you do. And, just as obvious is the Fact that not all of you do.

If I ask a stranger for car directions, that person can give bad information or good information. It is my responsibility to either belief or disbelieve the strange, trust or distrust.

But, once again, there is absolutely no necessity at all to either believe or disbelieve any thing at all there?

Are you able to answer and clarify why you believe, absolutely, that you only have a choice to either believe or disbelieve things, in Life?

If yes, then will you?

But, if no, then why not?

Also, if you have to ask another for directions, then this would usually mean that you do not yet know how to get where you want to go. So, what would you be basing 'the information' and your following chosen belief or disbelief on here, exactly?

That is why belief is critically important and necessary in daily life.

Why, exactly, is 'it' here, which you are now saying and claiming is the reason why belief, supposedly, is a critically important and necessary thing in so-called 'daily life'?

Beliefs change rapidly, everyday, every hour, every second.

Which is another perfectly good and logical reason why to choose not to have nor maintain absolutely any and all of those beliefs, ever and at all.

Some beliefs are strong and more resistant to change.

Obviously, only if you have chosen to make them that way.

Others are weak and easily forgotten or disregarded.

So, there was essentially no real sound nor valid reason to chose to have those beliefs in the beginning neither.

If you believe so, then this must be true, right?

Also, what is 'it', exactly, which makes you, supposedly, be able to do what no other human being can do?

And, how, exactly, have you, since conception, and/or birth, been able to prevent and stop "yourself" reacting emotionally, and with absolutely any bias at all, initially, upon receipt of absolutely any statement, or when perceiving absolute any and all information, in Life?

I've been trained, and train myself, to suppress emotional reaction to new information.

So, were you doing 'this' when you were in the womb, so that when you 'popped out' you already had 'this ability'?

Or, were you trained, and training "yourself", before 'the womb' stage?

Also, who or what else was training you to suppress emotional reaction to new information?

Others can do it too, but probably not as well as I can.

And, what are you basing this claim of yours here on, exactly?

It is necessary when it comes to Philosophy. Emotions should be as controlled as humanly possible. That doesn't mean that I do not have biases. Everybody does. And no amount of suppression is absolute or perfect.

1. Is it you that claims that I do not have or do not show 'emotions' here, like a human being should?

2. If one is neither believing nor disbelieving some thing as being either true or false, then what would that one be have a bias in regards to or about, exactly?

It depends on my, or your, or anybody's ability.

So, this one here believes that it was trained, and trained 'itself', to not have absolutely any emotional reaction to absolutely any new information that comes 'its way', which obviously includes any information about the injury or death of parents, siblings, or even children, but also finds it an absolutely impossibility to just neither believe or disbelieve any and all new information at all.

But what about when your father gives you the information that your mother has just died, for example?

Would you, or did, you also think about that statement, with the thoughts, 'Is it true or false?' 'Is it real or unreal?' 'I do not 'know' anything yet.' 'I do not 'believe' anything yet,' as well?

He could be wrong, misinformed, or lied to. No human is perfect.

I know. But why did you not just answer and clarify the actual question I posed, and asked you?

Also, why do you say and claim above here that, 'belief is critically important and necessary in daily life', but yet when you hear new information, like for example, 'Your mother has just died', you can, supposedly, control and not have absolutely any emotional reaction at all, and that you, supposedly, will also say, 'I don't believe anything yet', but also claim that you have to believe or disbelieve the truth of that statement?

How long can you remain in this, supposed, truly unemotional reaction and unbiased state and position before you have to, by necessity, either believe it or disbelieve it?

But only if you believe this.

To me, this never happens because I have chosen to not start believing, nor to disbelieve, that 'belief', and/or capital 'b' 'Belief' is necessary.

Then I think you're either 1. not human, or 2. lying about your beliefs and attempting to conceal them publicly.

Okay.

I'm leaning toward #1 given your inability to detect humor.

Okay.

But, is humor, to you, not subjective, and thus not relative to the observer here?

It 'this' how it goes for you?

If yes, then how things go for you is the exact same way they go for absolutely everyone else?

Possibly.

But not necessarily so, right?

Again, if you have chosen to believe that this is true, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, right, and correct, correct?

No, why do you insist if something is true, that it must be "absolutely" true?

1. Is asking a question, for clarity, insisting some thing?

If yes, then how, and why, exactly?

2. To me, if some one is believing some thing is true, then to me that thing would or must be true, well to them anyway, because for what other logical reason could and would a human being believe something to be true, if that thing was not absolutely true to them?

3. Why would any logical and reasonabe thinking human being believe something to be true, if there was any chance at all that it was not true in some way?

I await your answer, and clarity, here.

Also, do not forget that I have mentioned previously about country/cultural influences on you people here. For example, people might just say, for example, 'I believe [such or such] is true, when all along they do not actually believe 'this' at all, but have just copied and are following what other people say and do, in that country/culture, and have just ended doing this so much that doing it has just become such a habit to and/or for them.

In other words, I am Truly trying to discover from you people who believe things to be true, why you, individually, do believe things to be true, when they well may not be at all.

If absolutely any one can explain why they do this, then this would help out considerably in revealing and exposing, and explaining, the deeper and underlying fundamental reason why people believe things to be true.

I have just chosen to believe, or have belief in, one thing, only.

Also, 'belief' and/or 'knowledge' are not things that I 'own'.

There is obviously what is referred to and called 'knowledge', existing, and if there is 'belief' existing or not, then that is a choice one makes.

By the way, why do you use a capital 'b' and a capital 'k' here?

I capitalize concepts as a means to generalize them toward universality and absolution, to apply them to every case.

Okay, thank you for clarifying here.

This is more or less why I do the same here. That is; if any one were interested.

And I don't know how it's possible to "choose not to believe in beliefs of every kind". So you need to explain that.

1. To me, I do not even know what you mean nor what you could even be referring to here with the words, 'beliefs of every kind'.

2. I have not chosen not to believe in beliefs of every kind.

3. I have just chosen neither to believe, nor to disbelieve, in any thing, other than what I have already obviously.

4. Does some sort of presumption or belief exist within you that I somehow 'have to' believe more things?

If yes, then why do you think that presumption or belief persists?