In private equity we throw around convictions a lot, or talk about what we believe. But: that’s not the same. Conviction in defense is not measured by capability alone, but by credible intent to act. The same applies to venture capital: your portfolio is a map of what you’re willing to stand behind when it matters.
Philosophical and Psychological Distinction
- Belief is a mental representation or acceptance that something is true or exists. It may be weak or tentative, passive or inherited. You can believe something without acting on it or defending it rigorously.
- Conviction, by contrast, is a deeply held, emotionally salient, action-oriented belief. It implies firmness, a readiness to act or make decisions based on that belief, and resistance to contradictory evidence unless it’s overwhelming. It’s belief with commitment and affective intensity.
David Tuckett’s Conviction Narrative Theory offers an excellent bridge here. In contexts of radical uncertainty (like investing), people do not rely on probabilistic reasoning alone. Instead, they construct emotionally meaningful narratives that give rise to conviction—which allows them to act in the face of incomplete information.
In Venture Capital
In venture capital, belief might describe a general thesis—“AI will transform defense logistics.” But conviction is what catalyzes capital deployment: “We will back this founder, with this approach, in this timeline.”
Howard Marks implicitly echoes this distinction: disciplined investing is not about forecasting macro events, but about having conviction in one’s judgment under uncertainty—earned through pattern recognition, probabilistic reasoning, and deep domain knowledge.
“To be successful, an investor has to be able to take a different view from the consensus and to bet against it. And he has to be right. That’s what makes it so difficult.”
— Howard Marks, “Dare to Be Great II” (2014)
Conviction is also adaptive, not rigid. It allows room for doubt without paralysis, which aligns with my idea of conviction without dogmatism.
In Theology
In theology, the distinction is further amplified:
- Belief may refer to doctrinal acceptance (e.g., believing in a higher power, scripture, or teaching).
- Conviction, however, signals faith in action—a lived principle, often tested under duress. In Christian theology, for instance, conviction involves the internalization of truth to the point that it governs one’s moral and existential choices.
In this sense, conviction is closer to witnessing—not just accepting but embodying belief.
Implications for Venture Capital and Decision-Making
In a field like private equity and venture capital — when operating under radical uncertainty, with dual-use technologies and defense entanglements — the ability to distinguish between belief and conviction is an asset:
- It tempers narrative inflation and grounds decisions in something closer to epistemic integrity.
- It highlights the emotional undercurrent of investment decisions, helping to audit whether a GP’s enthusiasm is truly conviction or just optimism dressed up as one.
Tuckett warns that conviction without narrative coherence leads to fragile decision-making. Conversely, when conviction is constructed with integrity—using narratives that remain open to disconfirming evidence—it becomes a powerful tool for resilient decision-making.
Dual-Use Technologies and the Moral Weight of Conviction
In modern military doctrine, especially U.S. Army and NATO-aligned forces, commander’s intent bridges the gap between belief and conviction. It outlines not just what is to be achieved, but why—providing a stable reference when facts on the ground change.
“Commander’s intent is a clear, concise statement about what the force must do and the conditions the force must establish with respect to the enemy, terrain, and civil considerations that represent the desired end state. Properly communicated, commander’s intent gives subordinates the ability to exercise initiative when unanticipated opportunities arise or when the original plan no longer applies.” — Military Review, March–April 2000 edition, page 66
This view aligns with FM 100-5 (Operations), reflecting the evolution of U.S. Army mission command thinking post-Vietnam and especially post-Desert Storm, emphasizing initiative in decentralized environments. But more than that, it argues that conviction requires emotional salience and clarity of endstate—not just probabilistic reasoning.
In dual-use investing, belief is abundant — slide decks full of AI, autonomy, or hypersonics. But conviction means underwriting a technology that may be used for both liberation and lethality. Conviction includes a second layer: the moral and societal consequences of deployment. Writing the check isn’t just an act of confidence — it’s a signal of ethical clarity.