No person can know reality with absolute certainty. They can only have thoughts/beliefs about it.

When one changes their thoughts or beliefs about it, they can only think/believe that they made a mistake in their previous belief. They can't be absolutely certain. (Perhaps changing their belief is the mistake.)

People do like to believe that they are presently right.

If you think you are certain about what you believe, you only think/believe you are certain. You don't know.

Since belief is temporary,(my conclusion) belief is basically a point of view. Points of view are perspectives and opinions.

If actual facts and truth don't change then you cannot be absolutely certain about either because they must be considered from a personal perspective which is a personal point of view or opinion.

I am certain I exist because I experience existing personally.
I know I exist.

I believe you exist but I can't be absolutely certain of it because I do not experience your existence/existing personally.

This notion of "absolute certainty" has already been discussed. There's nothing new here.

--

If you choose to believe that we cannot know that we've made a mistake, there's not much more to say.

I am talking about a mistake in having believed something that you no longer believe.

If you disagree with me that is simply your perspective and your opinion. We disagree. You chose to believe otherwise.

But

If I ran my car off of a cliff on accident and I am flying to my death, I can be pretty certain that I made a mistake.

A mistake, I believe, has more to do with taking a wrong action based on a wrong belief.

Yes, it has been discussed but it appears that you did not learn anything new from the discussion or change your opinion about what "knowing" is.

You said:

I think/believe X. X is not the case. I've made a mistake.

When you should have said:

I think/believe X. New information has revealed that X is not the case. I think/believe I may have been mistaken.

But you said "I've made a mistake" (and that seems to imply certainty.)

Example:

I used to be an atheist. I made a mistake.

or: I used to believe in God. I made a mistake.

Is a wrong belief a mistake or just a wrong belief or opinion? How does one know or decide a belief is wrong?

If you decide a belief is wrong are you certain that you are right about that? How certain are you?

If you are certain that you are right, then do you think/believe that everyone who disagrees with you are then wrong?

One can once have believed in something that they no longer believe in. That, and that alone does not constitute sufficient reason to conclude that the past belief was a mistake, or that it's replacement is a correction.

Presumptious.



Nonsense.

If X is not the case, then I've made a mistake.

If I had felt that the subject of certainty had been settled or that we had reached an agreement on it, I probably would not have brought it up again.

(You assumed it had been settled. I thought it had also, but it appears (to me) that it has not really.




True! but how do you KNOW that X is not the case?

How do you know that your belief is correct?

Or do you rely on IF?

I mean, does your statement rely on "IF?"

But I think I know what you are saying.

Example:

I exist.

IF I do not exist, then I am mistaken.

****

Fact: I exist.

Fact: I am not mistaken.


**

Question:

Is being mistaken the same as "making a mistake?"

What is the difference?

seems it's still being discussed, huh?

Indeed. There's nothing new here. Jb is using the term "certainty" to mean absolute certainty, and I'm not interested in revisiting.

The conversation has turned towards epistemological criterion, i.e. how do you know what you know, which is a different(but related) subject matter altogether. Although, that question has already been answered as well. There's nothing new here.

A mistake is a breach between thought/belief and fact/reality. Being mistaken and making a mistake are different ways to say the same thing. The danger comes when one confuses a choice made based upon personal tastes/preferences for making a mistake. Such as...

Person A prefers to homeschool their children. Person B feels that doing that does not offer the child as much exposure to the real world. Person B thinks A has made a mistake.

My take on it:

*Being mistaken has to do with a mistake of thought/belief.
Example ( I thought he was the murderer. I was mistaken.)

*Making a mistake has to do with taking action.
Example: ( I thought he was the murderer and so I shot him. I made a mistake.)



Ambiguous.

If homeschooling is a mistake, person A has made a mistake if they actually are home schooling.

If person A is only thinking that homeschooling is the thing to do, then he is mistaken, but if he has not taken action on it he has not actually made that mistake.

Well, as they say, "There is nothing new under the sun"

At what time would "certainty" not be absolute?

"Are you certain?"
"I think I am certain, but I'm not sure."

(If you are not sure, then you are not certain.)


I'm almost certain?

Is that really certainty? (I don't think so.) If my doctor said he was certain that I had a fatal disease and I asked him if he was absolutely certain, and he said no, then can I hold out some hope that he is wrong?

To me it seems certainty = absolute certainty.

Is being a little bit certain, like being a little bit pregnant?

Being "almost certain" is not certain at all. It is like throwing horse shoes. There are no points for "almost."

You are either certain or you are not.

How about relatively certain? 99% certain is not "absolute."

If you are not absolutely certain should you put the word "relatively" in front of certain?

If you don't, then I will assume that you are absolutely certain.

Agreed, if he was not the murderer, then that is the aforementioned breach(mistake).



If results match expectation, there was no mistake made in action. Taking action based upon a mistake in thought, does not equate to a mistake in action. A mistake in action is a breach between results and expectation(thought/belief about what will happen and what happens). You intended upon shooting him and you succeeded. The result matched up to the expectation. No breach, no mistake.

You missed the point regarding homeschooling.

Okay I get it.

So the "mistake" was the wrong thought/belief, not the action.

Very interesting.

I'll use that in court next time I kill someone.

"Your honor, I made a mistake! I thought that man was going to kill me, so I shot him."

It was an accident. Not guilty!

At the time when one recognizes that they could be mistaken. That recognition of our own fallibility does not warrant the notion of an absolute lack of certainty, which is self-defeating nonsense. The better question is what constitutes sufficient reason to be certain? The answer would be when there is no good evidence/reason to think/believe(doubt) otherwise.



Then the correct answer would be "No, I'm not certain".



Well you're wrong. It does not follow from the fact that one is certain about X, that one holds absolute certainty.



"A little bit certain" is a conflict in terms.



You're arguing with yourself, who said anything about being a little bit, or almost certain?



If one is not certain, then they ought not claim certainty.



Then you would be making an ill-grounded assumption regarding another's certainty based upon your own misconception of it.

You can't have it both ways.

From your answer you are having it both ways.

If you are certain, then you are absolutely certain.

If you are not absolutely certain then you are either "not certain" or your are "somewhat" or "relatively certain" (leaving room for error.)

I see nothing wrong (or ill-assuming) with assuming that "certain" means absolutely certain.

So on this, if you can't convince me otherwise, I will disagree.

I will reword my statement then.

If you say you are certain, I will assume that you believe that you are absolutely certain.