Western philosophy emerged in Greece when the first philosophers, the pre-Socratics, raised the need to think with rational criteria and not according to the schemes of mythology. One of the key concepts to understand philosophical rationality is precisely the concept of doxa, which is traditionally translated as opinion.
Doxa versus episteme
We all have our own opinions on various matters. The opinion is based on the subjective assessment of something (I think the cakes are good but a friend considers the opposite). The plurality of personal evaluations makes it impossible to build true knowledge starting from simple opinion. If we want to get closer to the truth, we must go down the path of knowledge or episteme.
The difference between opinion and knowledge (doxa and episteme) was addressed by Parmenides and later by Plato. According to the first, the doxa is based on the senses, desires and personal experiences, while the episteme is the attempt to construct truths far from individual subjectivity. According to Plato, the doxa is knowledge that depends on appearances and, therefore, is misleading (those who defended their ideas according to the doxa, Plato contemptuously called doxographers, which we could translate as opinion-makers).
For most Greek philosophers doxa is a substitute for true knowledge. Through opinion we can communicate, share experiences and value any aspect of reality from our individual point of view. However, if we want to know something with a criterion of truth and in an objective way, we must go the way of the episteme. This distinction between one form of knowledge and another is decisive for understanding the difference between what is scientific and what is not.
Belief versus science
The reflection on the doxa and the episteme in philosophers like Parmenides and Plato, is a question that allows us to better understand our mental schemes. Some knowledge is based on personal beliefs (for example, religious faith), while others are based on strictly rational and empirical criteria (for example, biology as a scientific discipline).
Despite the distinction between belief and science, they are not totally incompatible fields, since beliefs can be accompanied by rational arguments and, in parallel, scientific truths can lead to beliefs of a spiritual nature (for example, an astronomer can believe in God because he considers that the order of the universe must have been created by a higher being).
Photos: Fotolia - b_plan88 / echiechi
