3

I found "I believe that fire is hot" sentence in the internet.

In the point of view of my country language, that kind of sentence is strange. It's just like someone say "I believe that my mother is a woman".

So, what does it mean "I believe that fire is hot" ?

Addition:

I've just downloaded the article which contains that sentence. :

With all due respect to these previous efforts (and many more I have not the time to synopsize), I will here propose my own continuum of belief types, with a somewhat different emphasis than any of those above. My main concern is to distinguish types of verification and degrees of commitment.

Here are some examples: I believe that fire is hot; I believe that an ax is a tool for chopping; I believe in gravity; I believe the earth rotates around the sun. I believe that the bird I saw was a raven; I believe you left the light on. I am convinced that there is a universal conspiracy against me. I believe God speaks to me and that I am his messenger.

These beliefs are differentiated on a number of levels. In the first instance, the belief that fire is hot is indisputable and proven by immediate personal experience. Fire burns. Source

Which I don't quite understand, if it's proven by immediate personal experience, why the sentence still use the word "believe" ?.

Isn't it just like somebody see it's raining and say "I believe it's raining now" ?

More addition:
To me, it will make sense if the one who say "I believe that fire is hot" has not experienced it yet. For example a kid who is about to touch a fire, the mother say : "don't touch it. it's hot".

If the kid believe his mother's words, then it makes sense if the kid say "I believe that fire is hot".

If the kid doesn't believe his mother's words, then the kid may say "I don't believe you" which indirectly means in the point of view of the kid "that fire is hot" is not correct. Assumed the kid ignore his mother's words, so he touch the fire and find it's hot. Wouldn't it'll be more appropriate that the kid say : "now I believe you, Mom" than "now I believe that fire is hot" ?

Improve this question
14
  • 2
    Without context, it can only mean exactly what it says: that the speaker believes that fire is hot. It may mean that the speaker is prepared to believe it without putting it to the test and being burned; it doesn't matter that it is actually true, he's taking it as true anyway. In that case, fire is a metaphor for whatever is being discussed in the context. If you edit your question to provide more than just those six words, it may be possible to answer it with more conviction.
    – Andrew Leach ♦
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 17:37
  • 3
    The writer is simply presenting the full range of "propositions" that he might introduce using the words I believe that [blah blah is true]. At one end comes his belief that fire is hot, which few would disagree with. At the other end of the spectrum, he has the belief that he is a "messenger of God" (most other people would probably think his belief on that point is mistaken, regardless of how strongly he holds it). I'm not going to read the whole of the context, but I expect he's arranging his beliefs in order of "credibility to others", rather than "strength of conviction".
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 17:57
  • 5
    There is nothing here that would need an explanation so far as English language and usage is concerned; the question is asking for an elucidation of the point of a philosophical text, which is outside the scope of this site.
    – jsw29
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 21:35
  • 5
    Welcome karma. This is not a question about English, it is about philosophy. It would be better answered here philosophy.stackexchange.com - In the meantime I'll just point out that right now I believe fire is hot even though I am not near a fire. I believe it because I have experienced fire in the past. However my memory could be faulty - maybe fire is really cold and I am mistaken. Also note that "hot" has no exact definition in terms of temperature. Fire is hot compared to what? The inside of a neutron star?
    – chasly - supports Monica
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 21:53
  • 2
    @HotLicks, 'fire is hot' is indeed a frequently used example of an obvious truth (I don't quite understand why you put truth in quotation marks), but its meaning is the most straightforward combination of the meanings of the words that constitute it, so it is not obvious why you think that it is something close to an idiom. In a philosophical text in a language other than English, one can use its straightforward, word-for-word translation for exactly the same purpose.
    – jsw29
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 22:20

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
11

As it states, it's giving a range of the "continuum of belief types", starting with something that is essentially indisputable and ending with things that require a strong religious bias. The point is that "believe" can be applied to any of these, so one must always analyze statements of belief in the context of the subject and the speaker.

Improve this answer
14
  • In deference to your contributions, I certainly am curious if you have either: 1) any references to substantiate your claim that this is general knowledge that said phrase is idiomatic or 2) can explain to me how it meets the necessary and sufficient criteria for being in an idiom either in the senses: "greater than the sum of the parts", "frequent usage but agrammatical", and/or "prevalent in a subcuture".
    – J D
    Commented Oct 29, 2020 at 15:58
  • @JD - google.com/…
    – Hot Licks
    Commented Oct 29, 2020 at 16:52
  • And couldn't the same evidence be produced for the language string "I run" which is clearly not an idiom, and if so, since using Google to determine a frequency of strings doesn't entail being an idiom, by virtue that frequency alone isn't sufficient, are you using other criteria?
    – J D
    Commented Oct 29, 2020 at 17:25
  • @JD - Look at the "hits".
    – Hot Licks
    Commented Oct 29, 2020 at 17:27
  • Thank you for the answer, Hot Licks.
    – karma
    Commented Oct 30, 2020 at 16:37
4

Out of context, we can only guess to the intent.

It could be a retort to a person making their own statement, thinking they are sharing some new discovery or revelation. "I believe that fire is hot", as if to say, "tell me something that isn't obvious."

Your own example is one that would be similar in tone.

On the other hand, the phrase appears in a paper "What is Bread" The Anthology of Belief

I will here propose my own continuum of belief types, with a somewhat different emphasis than any of those above. My main concern is to distinguish types of verification and degrees of commitment. Here are some examples: I believe that fire is hot; I believe that an ax is a tool for chopping; I believe in gravity; I believe the earth rotates around the sun. I believe that the bird I saw was a raven; I believe you left the light on. I am convinced that there is a universal conspiracy against me. I believe God speaks to me and that I am his messenger.

Here, we see no sarcasm or insult, just a set of thoughts that form a logical discussion.

NOTE: OP edited this exact text just as I finished my answer. Timing is everything.

Improve this answer
6
  • thanks for the answer though I don't fully understand it because of my limited English.
    – karma
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 18:01
  • 2
    What we have here is a relatively subtle arrangement of "beliefs" on a "cline" (continuous scale). But although what we might expect is for those beliefs to be arranged according to "level / strength" of belief, what the actual examples suggest is that they're arranged in order of extent to which other people share that belief. At least, that's what I think.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 18:03
  • 1
    ...Actually, having looked at it more carefully, I now think the writer isn't the most careful thinker around. I don't think there actually is a clearly-defined "cline" being illustrated by his examples, which are mostly just a mish-mash of different beliefs that might be held more or less strongly, might be more or less uncontroversial, or might be easier or harder to verify, etc. All he's really saying is "belief" covers a wide range of attitudes.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 18:10
  • @FumbleFingers, "level / strength" of belief. I thought that is what the writer wanted to talk about. I wonder when someone see a very cloudy sky and say "I believe it's going to rain" is a kind of level/strength of believe also. Thanks for the comment.
    – karma
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 18:21
  • 1
    No, it's definitely not "strength of belief". The writer has "Fire is hot" at one end, and "I am God's messenger" at the other. But in the middle are a couple of things like "Who left the light on?" and "What kind of bird is that?". It simply isn't credible that he'd have given that "God's messenger" example if he didn't totally believe this, with full religious fervour. The main thing that changes as we move through his "spectrum" is "How likely is it that other people would think he's mistaken?". But it's not really clear or consistent.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 28, 2020 at 18:31
4

I believe your confusion stems from assuming that a "belief" has to be something you don't know for sure or something that is unproven.

That is not the case. One definition of "to believe" is given as:

to think that something is true, correct, or real (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/believe)

It has nothing to do with whether the statement is actually true or not or how proven that statement is. Belief simply describes what you think of that statement. If you consider it true, you "believe" it.

If you consider the fire hot, you "believe" it to be hot.

Your confusion may be caused by the fact that people don't usually add the the "I believe" to statements that are generally accepted to be true anyway. This is because you don't need to specify that it is your belief, when it is already accepted as fact by your audience.

But, you do still believe it. It is simply unsaid because everyone believes it as well or because it would be cumbersome to write and say it all the time.

Improve this answer
2
  • 2
    +1 Good distinction!
    – J D
    Commented Oct 29, 2020 at 14:03
  • Thank you for the answer, The Z
    – karma
    Commented Oct 30, 2020 at 16:31
2

Answer

To declare your belief in something is not idiomatic, but rather is a declaration related to the certainty in truth. Many times, what we believe isn't guaranteed, but is somewhat determined by probability. 'I believe the sun will rise tomorrow' is an admission, that according to induction, it might not actually rise.

Since ancient times, there has been a recognized difference between 'belief' and 'knowledge' with the difference being studied by the discipline of epistemology. The dominant notion has always been the justified, true belief model. Essentially, just because you believe something doesn't actually make it a truth, a principle lost on the less astute. Let's do an example:

I believe Socrates is in the kitchen because his wife told me so.

Is it true he is in the kitchen? That depends on the strength of the claims of the testimony of his wife, and whether his physical presence is detectable there. It could be that she's lying (some say he wasn't fond of her anyway), and it could be she is mistaken. In an extreme case, he might be dead, and then one could argue that Socrates no longer exists. In epistemology, ideas like justification bump up against deception, illusion, hallucination, fallacy, and other phenomena that make beliefs on their face which appear true to be actually false by way of unsound, invalid, weak, and uncogent argumentation.

Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    Thank you for the answer, J D
    – karma
    Commented Oct 30, 2020 at 16:33

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.