Hi Eric, while I will undoubtedly agree that some kinds of beliefs require faith, I will unhesitatingly disagree with your claim, "All beliefs... depend on faith." I would also very quickly retort to the claim, "Belief is desire."

Let's think about this. There's a striking dissimilarity between, say, my belief that there's a laptop in front of me (at the time of writing this), and my belief that hell exists. The former is a world-to-mind belief, where my belief is (somehow) grounded on the natural world. The latter is mind-to-world, where my belief (somehow) comes from my mind, and not grounded on the natural world.

It's still plausible to argue that the latter requires faith. Or that the structure of this belief is similar to that of (religious) faith. But I think it's implausible to say that for the former. My belief that there's a laptop in front of me clearly isn't the same (structurally or substantially) as, say, believing in God.

Even if we grant that faith is required for both kinds of beliefs (which I don't), they're different kinds of "faith" - structurally and substantially.

While it's contestable whether beliefs in scientific facts is akin to mind-to-world or world-to-mind, I don't think it's true (or at least, it's too strong) to claim that "all beliefs depend on faith."

Furthermore, beliefs and desires are utterly different things. It's metaethics 101. Beliefs are truth-apt, i.e., they're either true or false. Desires aren't truth-apt. The difference is between saying, "There's coke" and "I want coke." They're totally different.

What you’re trying to say here, I think, is that people believe the things they want to believe. But I don’t think that’s possible. If I were to offer you a million bucks right now to genuinely believe you're made of glass, could you? Of course not. Beliefs don't work like this.

I was once asked about the origins of the universe. So, here I am doing philosophy. Ethics | Intellectual History | Chinese Comparative Philosophy