Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe stuff I can't see or prove, like everything is made up of atoms, and the stars are distant suns.
I believe them because trusted authorities (NASA, parents, teachers) have told me they're true.
However these are assertions about physical objects which can be physically examined and actually exist; also, millions of living people have done it for themselves (scientists, technologists) and to suppose they are all participating in some sort of sweeping grand conspiracy would itself be delusional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steiconi
But choosing an authority to trust can be difficult. If your parents, friends, clergy, and neighbors all agree on something, you'll probably believe it, too. If you aren't particularly analytical, you may never bother questioning it, and simply believe.
Exactly. We are hypersocial herd animals. It's an existential threat to be excluded from the herd. The herd = safety. It takes someone leaning towards autism or some other neurodiversity to go their own way either casually or by necessity. Others are forced by leaking abstractions and cognitive dissonance to look elsewhere than religion for the sake of their sanity.
Why care what other people think? If you don't find it credible that is fine, but live & let live.
Who is not letting others live as they please? Someone is looking for clarity on something that puzzles them. That is hardly implying a need to meddle in other's lives.
One explanation is that those people were indoctrinated into believing that it's true from childhood. When someone believes that something is true, regardless of what it is, it's hard to not believe that it isn't true. And because most, if not all, people are taught to be "good," people will try to justify their beliefs to be good.
Yes. If a belief-system is all you know, and all anyone you love or care about knows, and if you associate it with goodness or rightness, then belief is easy (if deployed along with the various coping mechanisms you have learned to help you not pay attention to contrary data) and unbelief is incredibly risky.
I have noticed people that split things into good and evil also tend not to make it past level 2 of moral reasoning. They have been told what is good or bad but don't seem to have that anchored as a principle which to work off. It's like a stand-alone rule. The reasoning for some of the good v bad things aren't founded in anything but being told it's bad.
Yes and that brings us to another reason people not just believe, but embrace and defend, unsubstantiated beliefs. It is the easy way out. It spares you wrestling with any difficult moral questions or doing anything that challenges your assumptions and beliefs or produces any form of self-doubt; you end up unable to steer a course that isn't 110% certain. It absolves you from any responsibility to ground your notions of good and evil in concrete boons or harms (especially to other people and even more especially to other people outside your tribe).
Yes and that brings us to another reason people not just believe, but embrace and defend, unsubstantiated beliefs. It is the easy way out. It spares you wrestling with any difficult moral questions or doing anything that challenges your assumptions and beliefs or produces any form of self-doubt; you end up unable to steer a course that isn't 110% certain. It absolves you from any responsibility to ground your notions of good and evil in concrete boons or harms (especially to other people and even more especially to other people outside your tribe).
They don't look at them like people. Watch the dehumanizing language. Look at all the backlash against empathy.
They don't look at them like people. Watch the dehumanizing language. Look at all the backlash against empathy.
It's a story old as time, and strictly speaking, does not require an explicitly religious justification, although religions are useful tools in this regard. The whole middle east conflict is riddled with dehumanizing phrases like "human monsters" and "animals", for example. The Ukranians tend to refer to the attacking Russians as "Orcs" and the Russians of course reply with "Nazis". Some of it is a coping mechanism once violence is in progress, but it all starts with depicting your opponents as somehow beyond the pale so that you can feel better about killing them. In the case of fundamentalists it's about otherizing the "unchurched" and "unbelievers" so that you can feel okay and even smug about them burning in hell for not thinking as you do.
It's a story old as time, and strictly speaking, does not require an explicitly religious justification, although religions are useful tools in this regard. The whole middle east conflict is riddled with dehumanizing phrases like "human monsters" and "animals", for example. The Ukranians tend to refer to the attacking Russians as "Orcs" and the Russians of course reply with "Nazis". Some of it is a coping mechanism once violence is in progress, but it all starts with depicting your opponents as somehow beyond the pale so that you can feel better about killing them. In the case of fundamentalists it's about otherizing the "unchurched" and "unbelievers" so that you can feel okay and even smug about them burning in hell for not thinking as you do.
Elitist entitlement is everywhere. People are objects to be used and have no intrinsic value. In my group it was the right "heart condition" that made them special
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 26 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,589,592 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by night912
One explanation is that those people were indoctrinated into believing that it's true from childhood. When someone believes that something is true, regardless of what it is, it's hard to not believe that it isn't true. And because most, if not all, people are taught to be "good," people will try to justify their beliefs to be good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L8Gr8Apost8
I have noticed people that split things into good and evil also tend not to make it past level 2 of moral reasoning. They have been told what is good or bad but don't seem to have that anchored as a principle which to work off. It's like a stand-alone rule. The reasoning for some of the good v bad things aren't founded in anything but being told it's bad.
The principle can be found in Newton's Third Law of Motion. "For every action, there is an equal (in size) and opposite (in direction) reaction."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
