There's I suppose some overlap with cognitive therapy, but it may have some (it probably doesn't) philosophical interest?

  • How to believe: are there rules of thumb?

e.g. don't believe what everyone else denies, or what makes no sense, even if it seems possible.

  • 3
    Is this the form in which you'd like to ask the question? It could use some more context and scoping.
    – user2953
    Apr 16, 2017 at 20:14

1 Answer 1


Asking if there are rules of thumb seems entirely psychological and answers to such a question would be only opinion.

Inquiry about how the intentionalistic primitives of perception (sensory nervous system) and action (motor nervous system) relate to the psychological capacity for belief or faith might have a more philosophical framework to explore: e.g. the logical structure, or, how empirical verification of such biological functions may be obtained and hypotheses confirmed.

  • your answer is quite good fun, but i don't see why philosophy has nothing to do with "how to believe"?
    – user25714
    Apr 21, 2017 at 10:03
  • @user3293056 I'm not sure why you imagine philosophy has nothing to do with "how to believe" - neuroscience inadequately explains the process. As it stands tho, the question is unclear. I'd be interested to see a little more clarification. What has your research uncovered so far?
    – MmmHmm
    Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02
  • hm rule of thumb means something more general than i thought, but i guess you understood me anyway?
    – user25714
    Apr 24, 2017 at 15:55
  • @user3293056 I think i get what you are aiming at & it is relevant as there is much to ponder in between the boundaries of psychology and cognitive neuroscience, for example, the mind often believes it is thinking while merely passing from one metaphor to the next. How does this happen? What is going on there? Sure there are the "laws" of thought, but how do we then explain how contradictions are believed, etc.
    – MmmHmm
    Apr 24, 2017 at 22:18

You must log in to answer this question.