My question concerns those instances where someone states they believe
p, and yet their behavior indicates they believe
not-p. How are we to understand these instances?
In each example let's be generous and assume each person believes they believe what they say they believe.
Example 1
Jim is at the Grand Canyon and says, "I believe it is perfectly safe to walk out on the skywalk." However, when he walks out on it he begins to shake, trembling with fear. Does Jim believe the skywalk is perfectly safe, or no?
Example 2
Betty says that she trusts her boyfriend, Bill. And yet, when Bill is not around she often worries that he is acting in an untrustworthy manner. Does Betty believe Bill is trustworthy, or no?
Example 3
Elmer states that he believes all races are equal. And yet, Elmer exhibits implicit bias in his everyday interactions with those of races other than his own. Does Elmer believe all races are equal, or no?
Theological example 1
Percival says that he believes he is forgiven by the grace given in Jesus Christ. And yet, Percival experiences fears that he is unforgiven. Does Percival believe that he is forgiven, or no?
Theological example 2
Fred, a professing Christian, says that he believes Christians should help the poor. And yet, Fred makes no effort to help the poor. Does Fred believe Christians should help the poor, or no?
I have tried to give a wide variety of examples in hopes of helping us get a better sense of the issue. People's belief statements are sometimes at odds with their behavior, reactions, experiences, etc. There seems to be several explanations.
One possibility is that in spite of what one says they believe, their actions, reactions, behavior, etc. belie the truth. They may say they believe
p, but their behavior shows they really believe
not-p. This does not mean they are lying when they say they believe
p, but it does raise the question as to why they think they believe something when it seems they don't.
Another possibility is that a person can believe both
p and
not-p, just not with the same credence value (i.e. believes one more than the other). The problem with this explanation is that in the examples above each one clearly believes they believe one and not the other. So, how can one believe what they don't believe they believe.
Finally, the theological examples highlight one of the problems with assuming that Christian faith is simply a matter of mere belief. In Theological Example 1, the issue may be that Percival has a mere belief that forgiveness is given through Jesus Christ, but not the requisite trust that such grace has been given to him.
What are your thoughts? Do we believe things we don't believe? If so, how can one be mistaken about one's own beliefs? Or, do we really believe what we think we believe, but not as much as we might have assumed? What are some other possibilities?
As far as the theological examples go: Is faith a matter of mere belief, or is there something else entailed in faith, such as trust? Does one's beliefs need to be commensurate with one's behavior? Why or why not?