Self-Persuasion

[PrinceMyshkin]

If you live in a group, “like humans have always done, persuading others of your own needs and interests would be fundamental to your well-being. Sometimes you had to use cunning. Clearly you would be at your most convincing if you persuaded yourself first and did not even have to pretend to believe what you were saying. The kind of self-deluding individuals who tended to do this flourished, as did their genes. So it was we squabbled and scrapped, for our unique intelligence was always at the service of our special pleading and selective blindness to the weaknesses of our case.”

Ian MacEwen, Enduruing Love

[NikolaiI]

Interesting. I asked my friend Ross fairly recently if he thought humans were objective thinkers, or if we simply convinced ourselves of things and didn't pay much attention to reason; he said he thought it was some of both. Assuredly it is, and one of the big reasons for delusion in the human race is that we generally don't have the tendency to question what we are taught, not really, so we don't end up having original thoughts at all. The result is that we get ontologies and logic that is flawed, has never been critically examined, and does not even correlate to reality. I'd direct you to "The range of Buddhist ontology", by Kenneth K Inada, as fairly early in that article it addresses this issue, sort of.

[Nossa]

Assuredly it is, and one of the big reasons for delusion in the human race is that we generally don't have the tendency to question what we are taught, not really, so we don't end up having original thoughts at all. The result is that we get ontologies and logic that is flawed, has never been critically examined, and does not even correlate to reality.

I'm gonna have to disagree on this part.
I think humans DO question many things, otherwise you wouldn't be hearing people saying there's no God, and Galileo wouldn't have said that earth is round. I think that the main cause for today's civilisation and religion clashes, is that we're in the age of questioning almost everything. Which leads people to either be skeptic about everything, or to be just passive, or extreme in thier defending what they believe to be true. The point here isn't about questioning everything, cuz people do this nowadays, it's more about, knowing when to stop trying to force others to question everything too, and just accepting the fact that some people ARE happy with thier good old beliefs.

I believe that those people who do NOT try to convince anyone with thier own opinions, meaning that they don't try restlessly to shove thier opinions down people's throats, are those who ARE self-persuaded. In my opinion, some people tend to question the other's beliefs, in an attempt to be convinced that they're true, in the sense that, if the other is wrong, then I must be right, and therefore you can live happily ever after.
I'm pro questioning everything, and I'm not gonna tell you that there are 'limits' cuz I know that many people here will disagree, but if someone is convinced with something, that you see as not true, and should be questioned, do you go on debating about it?! or do you just leave that person for his/her beliefs?

[PrinceMyshkin]

There are two ways, I think, that we can handle our beliefs:

1) I believe this and am interested in learning more for or against it.

2) I believe this and NOTHING is going to change my mind about it, ever.

Those who are in the 2nd category invest the whole of their egos in their beliefs, as if to say I am my beliefs. They cannot, on the whole, tell the difference between

a) I believe this because the evidence suggests that it is true; and

b) It must be true because I believe it.

[Nossa]

There are two ways, I think, that we can handle our beliefs:

1) I believe this and am interested in learning more for or against it.

2) I believe this and NOTHING is going to change my mind about it, ever.

Those who are in the 2nd category invest the whole of their egos in their beliefs, as if to say I am my beliefs. They cannot, on the whole, tell the difference between

a) I believe this because the evidence suggests that it is true; and

b) It must be true because I believe it.

I agree to a certain extent though. Without getting into details, some beliefs aren't supposed to be debatable for that person who believes in it..like for instance the belief in God...those who believe in God shouldn't say that they're alright with learning something that goes against it, with the intention of that they may change thier opinions, or else it's not a belief but an opinion that can be changed any time ( I don't wanna get into a debate about God here...please)
About the second point you stated, there is NOTHING called 'It must be true cuz I believe it' and I agree that nowadays, proof on your believs should be provided..BUT the thing that many people might not understand is the fact that somethings might not have a certain proof, yet you 'know' it's true. I know how that might sound to you or anyone who's in favor of scientific and logical explaination for things..but trust me I know! However, I'm NOT saying that these things should be believed in by everyone just cuz I say it's true..everyone is entitled of thier own beliefs and notions, I'm just saying that there are things that might not apply to the logical explaination, at least not for those who believe in.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I agree to a certain extent though. Without getting into details, some beliefs aren't supposed to be debatable for that person who believes in it..like for instance the belief in God...those who believe in God shouldn't say that they're alright with learning something that goes against it, with the intention of that they may change thier opinions, or else it's not a belief but an opinion that can be changed any time ( I don't wanna get into a debate about God here...please)
About the second point you stated, there is NOTHING called 'It must be true cuz I believe it' and I agree that nowadays, proof on your believs should be provided..BUT the thing that many people might not understand is the fact that somethings might not have a certain proof, yet you 'know' it's true. I know how that might sound to you or anyone who's in favor of scientific and logical explaination for things..but trust me I know! However, I'm NOT saying that these things should be believed in by everyone just cuz I say it's true..everyone is entitled of thier own beliefs and notions, I'm just saying that there are things that might not apply to the logical explaination, at least not for those who believe in.

Notice me saying nothing about [deleted]?

The only time I think it might be not only valid but necessary to dispute anyone's beliefs in [deleted] is when they request such a discussion or when they try to impose their beliefs on others.

[Nossa]

I understand you didn't say anything about * *...and I didn't say you did..lol
And I understand totally what you're saying..and even agree.
I'm a strong believer, but I hate it when I see people who are the same as me, trying to convince people by force that they're right. I don't think that I'm in a position of even starting a decent and profound discussion about such topic, it needs a lot of knowledge and a lot of resources that I do not have...plus, I wouldn't like anyone to try to impose thier opinions on me, so I start by NOT doing the same thing I hate.

[NikolaiI]

I'm gonna have to disagree on this part.
I think humans DO question many things, otherwise you wouldn't be hearing people saying there's no God, and Galileo wouldn't have said that earth is round. I think that the main cause for today's civilisation and religion clashes, is that we're in the age of questioning almost everything. Which leads people to either be skeptic about everything, or to be just passive, or extreme in thier defending what they believe to be true. The point here isn't about questioning everything, cuz people do this nowadays, it's more about, knowing when to stop trying to force others to question everything too, and just accepting the fact that some people ARE happy with thier good old beliefs.

I believe that those people who do NOT try to convince anyone with thier own opinions, meaning that they don't try restlessly to shove thier opinions down people's throats, are those who ARE self-persuaded. In my opinion, some people tend to question the other's beliefs, in an attempt to be convinced that they're true, in the sense that, if the other is wrong, then I must be right, and therefore you can live happily ever after.
I'm pro questioning everything, and I'm not gonna tell you that there are 'limits' cuz I know that many people here will disagree, but if someone is convinced with something, that you see as not true, and should be questioned, do you go on debating about it?! or do you just leave that person for his/her beliefs?

Ha, well I think the biggest thing about the debate question is that people are rarely on the same page in that. One person would think the other wants to discuss or debate it, yet the other really does not, and so what happens is one person is really put off by the other. That is similar to making someone cry when you were just trying to tease. So it's best to debate only if everyone wants to..

The thing I have about it is that most people are so far from examining the first principles their beliefs are based on, that they never will. They take for matter of fact the way their worlds work, the way things interact, and they never stop to question the bases of their beliefs, or first principles..I have a problem with it only as far as I think it is responsible for some of the evils in this world, and I think our lack of thinking for ourselves is very responsible for certain recent events..

The quote in the first post is right, and that's how this system came to be; what was respescted, what was seen as right, was not what was logical in any way, it was whoever was strongest, whoever bellowed the loudest, whoever had the most power, and these people became the makers of reality, and what should have been considered absurd never was, and everything got twisted. All I want to share is that the common understanding of reality is flawed at its very base, and is based on principles that have never been examined, in fact are not understood. What the ontology is is not understood. I offer one that is more logical, one that has not been created to preserve the identity of a culture or anything like that.

[PrinceMyshkin]

We are always the first ones to believe our own lies.

[Nossa]

Actually, my problem here isn't with question the common notions that people supposedly have taken for granted, my point here is simply saying that, it's okay to differ in how we look at the world, we do NOT need to fight in an attempt to see who lasts longer, and therefore announce him the winner.
Whether your a believer or not, whether you're following a certain religion or not, I don't have to fight with you cuz of your own beliefs, just cuz they happen to contradict mine. And even when we discuss things, I hate the fact that some people only discuss certain matters just for showing off and trying ti prove that they can talk better or state thier opinions in a more 'logical' way, whatever that logic is, and totally forget the idea of pursuing the truth.
And another thing is that, I believe that yes you might wanna talk someone into a certain idea or philosophy...but how much is too much debating?! That's my question.
What's wrong in letting people live and believe in what you might wanna call 'our own lies'?!
Don't you think that the other looks at you with the same look, how would you feel if that very person tried talking you into thier own beliefs, restlessly, and sometimes even without the minimum respect to your own beliefs?!
I don't mean that anyone in this thread does that, but I'm talking about what I mostly see nowadays.
Bottom line is, I believe that everyone is entitled of thier own lives and beleifs, if they don't wanna believe otherwise, it's thier option, it's not your task in life to correct what you see as wrong, just cuz you think so.

[NikolaiI]

I see that too, sometimes, although I've never seen anything like that in a discussion with my friends about philosophy, religion or politics or anything. Well actually I have one friend I will get into pretty severe debates about it all, and another...I miss those. And another who we argue semantics with. But all of that is just for fun, and even when it gets really heated, it's just for fun. On here it's a whole different animal, since it is both more anonymous, and since we are more or less writing letters to each other.

You're right; I have to agree with pretty much everything you said. If I ever came off that way, I have failed myself and others. I don't think it's right to compare people to each other, value-wise; to say one is better than another, either for what they have done, what they believe, what they possess, or anything like that. I think most of the divisions we believe in are flawed, including race, nationality, gender, age, all of those things.

I don't wanna prove anyone wrong, or be right if it means someone else has to be wrong. This should never be a zero-sum game. I'm here to explore and learn, and I do this because I enjoy philosophy, logic, psychology, all of it, and I do have a passion for it. I'd like to share what I've learned, because I've come across some ideas that I think are amazing, and I want to be open to what other people have to share, because I like to discover new ideas that are amazing.

I'm here to discover. I like it, here, and I won't be here forever, so I'll try to get the most of it while I can.. I have made a couple of friends here, so that's good.

I don't think other people are wrong. I'm giving up that attachment right now. I don't believe in religion (I mean I don't believe it exists) and I don't believe in religious or any other kind of labels, but nor do I think it is wrong of anyone to believe whatever they want to.