The belief and that feeling and expression will be correlated but one is not the other.
That depends on how you define “belief”. My definition is that a “belief” is a representation in your brain that you use to make predictions or judgments about reality. The emotion experienced in response to thinking of the prohibited or “icky” behavior is the direct functional expression of that belief.
It would be possible to declare a model in which the “Ew, murder” reaction is defined as an expression of belief. But it isn’t a natural one and would not fit with the meaning of natural language.
I have noticed that sometimes people on LW use the term “alief” to refer to such beliefs, but I don’t consider that a natural usage. In natural usage, people refer to intellectual vs. emotional beliefs, rather than artificially limiting the term “belief” to only include verbal symbolism and abstract propositions.
That depends on how you define “belief”. My definition is that a “belief” is a representation in your brain that you use to make predictions or judgments about reality. The emotion experienced in response to thinking of the prohibited or “icky” behavior is the direct functional expression of that belief.
The definition as you actually write it here isn’t bad. The conclusion just doesn’t directly follow the way you say it does unless you modify that definition with some extra bits to make the world a simpler place.
That depends on how you define “belief”. My definition is that a “belief” is a representation in your brain that you use to make predictions or judgments about reality. The emotion experienced in response to thinking of the prohibited or “icky” behavior is the direct functional expression of that belief.
I have noticed that sometimes people on LW use the term “alief” to refer to such beliefs, but I don’t consider that a natural usage. In natural usage, people refer to intellectual vs. emotional beliefs, rather than artificially limiting the term “belief” to only include verbal symbolism and abstract propositions.
The definition as you actually write it here isn’t bad. The conclusion just doesn’t directly follow the way you say it does unless you modify that definition with some extra bits to make the world a simpler place.