• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Belief (or Lack Thereof) a Choice?

shunyadragon

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
No, but the end problem is that if the universe is physical, then this sentence is also physical:
Click to expand...

Likely true unless the physical exists in a greater paradigm of the non=physical, but than again the universe for all practical reasons is a matter of fact physical regardless

mikkel_the_dane said:
"The universe is not physical". But you can't express that in physical terms as false/wrong or what ever.
Click to expand...

. . . because it is a subjective philosophical/theological assumption.
 
RestlessSoul

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Nakosis said:
Nature being weird at the quantum level doesn't negate nature.
The fact that we can detect this "weirdness" at all supports its physicality.
Click to expand...


Not sure why you’re fixated on negation. To assert that nothing in this world is quite what it appears to be, is not to deny it’s existence. To question what it is we claim to know facts about, is not to question nature, but only to question our understanding of it. Which makes absolute sense given we can only access external reality via our internal, mental processes.
 
Last edited:
shunyadragon

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
Well, religion is not really a special category in either a positive or negative sense for the assumption of a natural world if you include sociology and psychology.
Click to expand...

Special category?!?!?! For practical real world proposes religious beliefs and religions is a reasonable well defined category concerning 'What people believe and not believe,' without getting too broad contorted and nebulous into the huge topic of psychology and sociology, Though yes, they can be apart of the discussion where relevant to the subject.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
RestlessSoul said:
Not sure why you’re fixated on negation. To assert that nothing in this world is quite what it appears to be, is not to deny it’s existence. To question what it is we claim to know facts about, is not to question nature, but only to question our understanding of it. Which makes absolute given we can only access external reality via our internal, mental processes.
Click to expand...

Ok, it you are not trying to negate the physicality of it, I guess we are on the same page.
 
RestlessSoul

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Nakosis said:
Ok, it you are not trying to negate the physicality of it, I guess we are on the same page.
Click to expand...


I doubt we are, quite. But that’s okay. I do not deny physics, but I do not consider a description of the material world to be a description of the entirety of human existence. We are tripartite beings, comprised of mind, body and spirit, and these are interdependent dimensions of reality. Deny, or place too much emphasis on, any one of these facets of being, and we create an imbalance; we become a two legged stool in effect.
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
shunyadragon said:
Special category?!?!?! For practical real world proposes religious beliefs and religions is a reasonable well defined category concerning 'What people believe and not believe,' without getting too broad contorted and nebulous into the huge topic of psychology and sociology, Though yes, they can be apart of the discussion where relevant to the subject.
Click to expand...

Well, believe and not believe are in practice culture and processes in brains, so I doubt you can avoid those 2.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
RestlessSoul said:
I doubt we are, quite. But that’s okay. I do not deny physics, but I do not consider a description of the material world to be a description of the entirety of human existence. We are tripartite beings, comprised of mind, body and spirit, and these are interdependent dimensions of reality. Deny, or place too much emphasis on, any one of these facets of being, and we create an imbalance; we become a two legged stool in effect.
Click to expand...

Sure, let me know when a third leg is found to support it.
 
PureX

PureX

Veteran Member
When we say, "I believe (in) X" all we are saying is that we are accepting that our understanding of "X" as correct (whether it is or not). So there is no reason why we couldn't choose to reverse that option at any time. And in fact, we all do so on occasion. We choose to no longer believe that our understanding of "X" was correct, and we adopt a new, changed understanding of it.

Those that claim they do not have a choice in the matter are only saying that because they have become "true believers" in the methods they use to determine an accurate understanding of "X" from an inaccurate one. They can't imagine that there might be any other better method, and so they cannot envision themselves ever choosing any other way. In their minds, and from their perspective, there is no other choice.

But of course this is untrue, as even the "true believers" do sometimes change their methods of determining what they believe. We know that, in fact, it can and does happen. Which then begs the question: why do we choose to believe in things at all given that we could always be wrong, and that our beliefs tends to blind us to that reality? Given the inevitability of error, why do we believe in anything? Why not just allow what is apparently correct and accurate to stand as correct and accurate until we discover otherwise? Why presume that we ever get it right?

I'm pretty sure the answer is that our ego demands it. But why did we ever develop such a cognitive mechanism as ago? What essential service does it provide us cognitively speaking?

I'm curious.
 
Last edited:
PureX

PureX

Veteran Member
Nakosis said:
Belief/non-belief is necessary but faith can be avoided.
Click to expand...
Just the opposite. Belief can be avoided as we have no particular need to presume ourselves to be right to make ongoing decisions and to act on them. But faith IS necessity in that we cannot know the outcome of our course of action before we take that action. We have to trust in advance that the outcome will be what we'd hoped it to be. That is called faith. Without it, we couldn't take any action at all.
 
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
LuisDantas said:
It is clear to me that not all people are capable of theistic belief. And that is a good thing. Atheism is necessary for the maintenance of intellectual and ethical honesty both inside and outside religions.

...
Click to expand...

Take #2
Those 2 bold ones for good and honesty are beliefs without evidence. That is all.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
PureX said:
Just the opposite. Belief can be avoided as we have no particular need to presume ourselves to be right to make ongoing decisions and to act on them. But faith IS necessity in that we cannot know the outcome of our course of action before we take that action. We have to trust in advance that the outcome will be what we'd hoped it to be. That is called faith. Without it, we couldn't take any action at all.
Click to expand...

Ok, I see it differently.
I have to believe in the physicality of reality but I don't need to have faith in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top