"In short the statement is only true for the rather small subset of things that can be scientifically investigated"
Which fundamental things cannot get scientifically investigated?
Which fundamental things cannot get scientifically investigated?
For example what is the purpose of the universe? Is this the only universe? Is it a simulation? Is everything predetermined?
If it would be, we could scientifically test for the limits of the experimentation model. You can say, all of science is doing this effectivly. So far, no flaws have been found. If there were flaws, then within our models, so we adapt them, systematically approaching reality.
Now sure, if there would be an allmighty god, we would have no chance proofing him or her, that is tautological. But if it would be "just" aliens of a higher level, doing rat lab experiments with our universe, we could figure that out eventually.
Actually, let me make a stronger statement than before: Even for scientific facts the statement is weak. If I stop believing that the world is round, then what does it mean that the „roundness“ will not go away? From my point of view it certainly goes away and the world _will be_ flat. In order to accept that it is, objectively, not flat I have to accept other information, often information that I do not check or verify myself.
But subjectively, if I really stop believing the world is round then for sure it will start to feel flat.
So this criterion is not a good one.
I think it only is useful in the world of „succeeding“. So for example I may believe that a vaccination is dangerous and as a consequence I may die if unvaccinated. This is an example of reality not going away. Or I may believe that I can pass a test without studying but then I don‘t and so that‘s reality, again.
You’re still accumulating risk though. You don’t know when a false belief will lead yo to make a consequential error, and also false beliefs could lead you to adopt faulty attitudes or ways of thinking that could lead you towards false beliefs in consequential ways. Or you could propagate such false beliefs to others, which may be consequential for them.
What you‘re suggesting about a false belief is an „unknown unknown“ so again the criteria of the quote is pretty useless in practice.
No, it simply means that you will start to build on a flawed premise and will run into the limitations of your knowledge sooner rather than later. Being informed about the world allows you to make better decisions and to reach further in the achievement of your goals. That is why the scientific method is so successful and why science and not obstinacy has driven us forward further in the last 500 years than in all of the preceding millennia together.