Coworker. I told him to fuck off with his conspiracy bullshit. But back when I patronized him, one thing he said was that he didn’t consider belief a binary as in that you either believe something or don’t. He viewed all beliefs as a continuum. You can believe one thing 10% and another thing 90%, but he wouldn’t let me pin him down as to whether he “believed” any particular thing or not.
All while trying to convince me “tall white aliens” run the U.S. government and Sandy Hook was faked by a bunch of actors and the U.S. military had invisibility technology and planes that aren’t dumping weather-controlling chemicals don’t leave trails in the sky. Pretty standard QAnon-level bullshit. But if I asked him if he believed any of those things, he wouldn’t answer. Honestly, it makes sense as a dishonest rhetorical tactic.
Dude also literally drinks borax in his juice cleanse drink.
That seems pretty reasonable. The only thing I believe 100% is that my consciousness exists in some way. I’m about 99.9% certain that reality is roughly as I experience it (I have a physical body, the things I witness correlate to an external world, I’m not a brain in a box or in some kind of simulation, etc.). Every other belief carries some higher degree of uncertainty.
I think of how much evidence I’d need to believe something. If someone told me their dad was childhood friends with Bill Clinton, I probably wouldn’t believe them, but all it would take to convince me would be a yearbook and a couple old photos. If someone told me they had a tea party with Sasquatch, they could show me a video and I’d still assume it was faked.
This seems like a healthy perspective, to me. The problem pops up when you start assigning high confidence levels to unlikely claims, or spend too long obsessing over low confidence claims. I suppose aliens could run the government, but even 10% confidence is way too high.