badgerx16

Go to the Bible Belt and try it.

How many of his d!ckhead fans will overdose on UV lamps to get rid of COVID-19 and give themselves skin cancer instead ?

Red / dark red stripes, with yellow piping and underarm panels, as per the images Steve Grant posted ?

Perhaps, but it is my birthday so let me have some fun.

He wont get re-elected if his supporters follow his medical guidance.

MLG, surely the presence and quality of evidence is dependent on the individual's perspective. There are many millions of people who beleive in God and Jesus, and accept there is ample evidence. These people also have faith, therefore faith is not " without evidence". Your dismissal of the evidence is simply your personal choice, as you can neither prove your position nor disprove theirs.

I suggest DT puts himself forward as the first test patient. ( And Bolsonaro in Brazil can be #2 ).

Red / white horizontal stripes ?

Red

"when in combination with other posts". I'm not sure which 'other' posts I am supposed to have taken account of, it's a struggle to make sense of most of them.

So I didn't misquote you.

"QUOTE=Matthew Le God;2816269]- Faith is without evidence - Belief can be supported by evidence (hence why knowledge is a subset) If you have good evidence you don't need faith... you'd use the evidence![/quote" Where is the misquote ?

"Faith is without evidence"

My 5 year old grandson was asked this afternoon by his mother "Give me another word with an 'a' sound", ( expecting hat, cat, bat....... ) "Turkmenistan" was the answer.

So which of these sentences is correct ? "UFOlogists have faith in aliens." / "UFOlogists believe in aliens".

So, is acceptance that extra-terrestrial life exists faith or belief ?

Belief is the acceptance of a truth without the substantiation of evidence, and without the need for knowledge of demonstrable facts.

My contention is that your contention, ( knowledge is a subset of belief ), is false. ( And again, congratulations on your unswerving ability to totally ignore the rest of my post, and it's context ).

At the start of a new football season do you believe that Southampton will retain their place in the Premier League, or do you know they will ?

Belief can be reinforced by evidence, but that is dependent on an individual's acceptance of that 'evidence'. If a strongly religious individual accepts their Holy scripture as incontrovertable truth, perhaps the direct Word of God, then that scripture serves as evidence to validate their belief. However, for many other people, as you have demonstrated on this thread, the evidence is viewed as weak / spurious / nebulous. In such circumstances the 'knowledge' is conditional. In the case of the goldfish, once the existence of the fish has been demonstrably proven, the knowledge is incontravertable, ( except for pedantic whataboutery ).

Why not answer the question concerning your gaining the empirical evidence that Lighthouse has a goldfish, and that therefore your belief in the possibilty is supplanted by your newly acquired knowledge of it's existence. At this point your assertion that knowledge is a subset of belief is disproved.

And if you go to his house and see his goldfish ? You are doing an excellent job of ignoring those bits of questions that might serve to prove you are misguided.

I think you Googled Platonic philosophy and found someting to try to hang your misguided argument on. From the starting point that you may, or may not, believe that Lighthouse has a pet goldfish, if you go to his house and see that he does indeed have a goldfish you then know that, and no longer merely believe it. This knowledge is not an intrinsic part of your prior belief, it supplants it.

As LD would put it, pony ! Knowledge is based on experience and evidential proof, belief exists without.

Silence is golden.