alt Hacker NewsPersonally, I consider "belief" from a behavioral perspective: belief is the model of reality one actually operates from.
For example, when I walk on my kitchen floor, I don't have to tell myself: "the floor is structurally sound, it's safe to walk on it." I just walk.
The fact that I just walk can be used to infer an infinite number of implied bleiefs that I've never verbalized until this moment. For example, I believe that:
1. The floor can support my weight.
2. The tiles aren't made of toxic materials.
3. I don't pay $$ by the step.
4. Walking on the floor doesn't cause my wife pain.
5. The floor isn't lava.
To refine my definition: a belief is that which systematically and implicitly guides my expectations, reactions, choices, etc.
In her glass skywalk example, Gendler lays out the definitions roughly so:
1. "I know this skywalk is sturdy and safe" = Belief
2. The hesitancy to cross the skywalk = Alief
But to me:
1. "I know this skywalk is sturdy and safe" = knowledge
2. Hesitancy to cross it = actual belief.
That's why in my vocavbulary it's perfectly fine to say: "I know it. But I don't believe it."
Similarly, if someone says, "I totally believe that planes are safe, but I'm terrified of flying", then I will think to myself: "nope; you totally don't believe that planes are safe."
That's an interesting perspective. It all starts to get a little too semantics oriented for my taste, but I think the basic idea you're proposing is that the beliefs live in what the neuro-folks would call the default mode network, where-as knowledge lives in some higher function part of the brain like the cortex.
Regardless of the mechanisms, I think we're agreed that it's important not just to examine your priors, but to be aware that there ARE priors in the first place.