You have the right to believe in whatever nonsense you wish -- but you also have the option of being wrong. That's what gets me. When there is clearly evidence that demolishes your beliefs, if you don't change then you're an idiot and not someone I want any more to do with.

Yes we do have the right but just remember opinions and beliefs are like arseholes we all have one and we don't want to see yours

yes so long as we don't push it on to anyone else - I keep my beliefs very close to my chest. And my mouth zipped. iIs only my business. Having said that I probably don't have many beliefs at all . Life just seems to come at me at such speed there isnt much time to form a belief. Probably just a hope, - Like the soup will be edible!

"If the content of a belief is judged morally wrong, it is also thought to be false. The belief that one race is less than fully human is not only a morally repugnant, racist tenet; it is also thought to be a false claim — though not by the believer. The falsity of a belief is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a belief to be morally wrong; neither is the ugliness of the content sufficient for a belief to be morally wrong. Alas, there are indeed morally repugnant truths, but it is not the believing that makes them so. Their moral ugliness is embedded in the world, not in one's belief about the world."

"If the content of a belief is judged morally wrong, it is also thought to be false." Why then does the writer seems to equivocate and say "Alas, there are indeed morally repugnant truths, but it is not the believing that makes them so". The difference perhaps lies in the word "repugnant". Perhaps the author has something like antinatalism in mind. Antinatalism has some iron clad logic behind its repugnant conclusion (that it is better not to have been born; and that it is morally wrong to decide to bring someone into the world because of all the pain and inescapable suffering inherent in life). If so then " Their moral ugliness is embedded in the world, not in one's belief about the world." fails in regard to reasoned argument.

Belief is attitudional a strong feeling of certitude. If so then belief is not entirely rational which is why there is so much of a problem discussing beliefs.

I also think the word "truth" has a variety of senses. The author suggests that knowledge in the strict sense must be true. But truth can also suggest an unveiling, an opening up of our notions expanding what we understand. Truth can also entail a kind of troth, a sense of being bound to it.

You can believe what you want till you learn it is wrong then if you still believe in false ideas that makes you an idiot!

One of things I hate about America, is that those that will say"I stand up for you to believe in want". But under their breath, they are saying, well only if it is what I believe.

Trump and Fox news make up alternate facts.....

I don’t know about others, but I don’t think it’s my choice whether or not to believe something. If the evidence is there I’ll tend to believe despite myself, and vice versa. Not mentioned are the various shades of belief. There is usually a small amount of doubt, or if I lean toward thinking something is true, there’s at least some possibility that it’s false.

Maybe truth is relative.

As long as you are responsible for your actions -which Herr Trump is not.

Yes.

The thing about beliefs is that many act according to what they believe. The people who flew the planes into the twin towers did so because of their beliefs. So. do you have a right to kill me because of your beliefs?

So, I suppose I could argue that we don't have a right to believe what we want. It depends on the context and consequences to others. If no one is negatively impacted by my actions based on my beliefs, it could be said believe away.

I have a friend whose mother is one of the 'we free' ultra ultra protestant sect -she says of her mum; that she think s the moon is made of blue cheese - My friend just puts up with it when she visits and sort of does her duty and sort of does love her mum in a strange sort of way - So I get the feeling its O.K to believe the earth is flat and has four corners because it says so in the bible, But I don't know that anyone else would buy it - in the same way its ok to be pleasantly loony tunes. I can't really relate to rights about facts I remember reading that half of what we think we know right now will be seen to have been untrue within ten years - I don't know if that is true or untrue but it sort of begs some sort of questions about both facts and fictions - moving on - not being set in stone.

I think you pretty much answered your own question. Believe whatever you want, but don't use fiction to influence public policy, and don't be offended if you get criticized if you do.

Rights and beliefs are conditional. Freedom is unconditional. We have choices which depend on the sum of our experience and the best way to try and lead our lives in the here and now. Our own facts are that we actually know so very little and everything can change in an instant with new facts that are just as solid as the old ones to us. I think beliefs are based on fantasies to fill in for facts, because facts can be a moving target. Beliefs are the end of facts. At least, that is my humble opinion. But, as I said, I don't know shit.

You can believe what you want, but acting on those beliefs is a different story. You have no right to foist your fictions on others and you do bear responsibility for the consequences of your actions.

Some people only live by their beliefs, they usually are not allowed out by them selves.