4 ms·
I'm not sure what you mean here by belief, but it seems like a redefinition that causes the word to lose value. "Believe" has always implied to me "understands
by Cogito 9y ago
I'm not sure what you mean here by belief, but it seems like a redefinition that causes the word to lose value.
"Believe" has always implied to me "understands to be true". How can I believe anything based only on the words of a single person? (Except trivial things like believing that they said something to you)
I have primarily heard the phrase "listen and believe" used by people who think it is impossible for certain kinds of people to understand the experiences of other kinds of people.
Following that argument, the claim is that if you assert an experience I am not capable of understanding then I must accept it, for I have no grounds to refute it.
This has always seemed like unquestioned faith to me, for I think any argument should be able to stand on it's own merit. Maybe I am missing some nuance to the argument, or perhaps there is more going on, but in any case 'believe' seems to be the wrong word.
- abritinthebay 9y agoshrug I'm using the usage that social and case workers use when they talk about believing victims. So... frankly, I don't really care what HN thinks of the usage. Note, again, that nothing you said is counter to the "good faith" usage. You're assuming they are speaking the truth as they see it. That's all. That's how any investigation that involves eye witness testimony works. It's also the recommended practice for improving reporting and investigation so, again, don't really care what HN thinks about the term: the experts in the field recommended it.
- jpttsn 9y agoMaybe you meant to post this on Soical Worker News?
- abritinthebay 9y agoMaybe you meant to post this on Dunning Kruger News?