Quote:
Originally Posted by dreadgeek
Since this came up on another thread (the 2012 thread) I thought I'd start a new thread to talk about non-evidentiary beliefs. My questions are these:
1) Why hang onto beliefs for which there is no evidence?
2) Why is it considered *fair* for evidence-based beliefs to be held to a different standard than non-evidentiary beliefs?*
3) If one subscribes to a non-evidentiary belief is there ANYTHING that could dissuade one from believing it?
4) How does one tell the difference between 'good' non-evidentiary beliefs (say psychic powers) and malign ones (say racism or Pat Robertson's latest utterances).
*By non-evidentiary beliefs I mean things like psi-powers, fortune telling, God hates Haitians, etc. I do NOT mean things like "I love my children" or "My partner loves me".
Cheers
Aj
|
1. Because humans are both rational and emotional, and often unequally so. People who are more rational tend to ascribe more value to evidentiary beliefs; people who are more emotional may ascribe more value to what "feels right" or "resonates" or gives comfort. Also, people in general are fascinated by the unknown, the fantastic, the things that seem to them beyond their understanding. Believing in various concepts that cannot be proven with current knowledge (and may also be unable to be disproven by the same token) may simply enrich their lives in some way.
Shorter version: different strokes for different folks.
2. Because by categorizing the beliefs as evidence-based, you (collective, not personal) are asserting that you can prove they are true beyond a reasonable doubt or true within whatever explicit limitations are set forth, with facts, logic, and demonstrably repeatable results. There is no such intrinsic assertion for non-evidentiary beliefs, so they are not held to that standard.
Shorter version: it's in the name, "evidence-based."
3. This depends on the person and the belief, and where the person is in their journey. I believed a lot of things as a child that I do not believe as an adult, such as that termites were ant-angels (an older child had told me this). Some people cling to their beliefs, others habitually seek new knowledge. The latter group is more likely to be dissuaded, whereas the former very rarely will.
Shorter version: some people, sometimes.
4. Telling the difference between malign beliefs and benign beliefs is pretty much the same as telling the difference between benign and malign things in general: by their results.
If I believe that wearing a particular pair of socks makes me more likely to hit home runs, the worst possible outcome probably involves either a fit of pique when I cannot find my socks or an offensive odor if I am reluctant to wash them and lose their magic properties. If I believe that The Rapture is coming and its arrival will be indicated by a blinding light, then on sunny days I may well be a very real threat to the well-being and property of others if I am driving, flying, or otherwise operating heavy machinery.
Shorter version: Ye shall know them by their fruits.