What is Your Disbelief?

[PureX]

I believe there are plenty of souls to go around, and we don't need to recycle any. Like I said, I don't mind if others believe in reincarnation but I don't personally. And I do believe there is a soul.

Why believe anything when we cannot know? Why not just accept that it is a mystery?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why believe anything when we cannot know? Why not just accept that it us a mystery?

I would rephase that to say "Why believe anything when we do not yet understand it to be true? Why not just find out if we can understand the mystery?"

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

@Nakosis
Disbelief that there is anything physical and well as non-physical.
I mean I believe the universe is natural, but that is a sort of I trust in general my experinces to be real. Not that the universe is ontologically natural.

 

[PureX]

I would rephase that to say "Why believe anything when we do not yet understand it to be true? Why not just find out if we can understand the mystery?"

There are many mysteries that we humans will never be capable of unraveling. And even those we think we have unraveled, may still not be. So it's this notion of 'belief' that I find illogical. And somewhat dishonest. Even when we get an 'answer' we could simply accept its validity provisionally. We don't need to 'believe in' it. And when we have no apparent answer, we could just accept that it is a mystery. And again, no need to 'believe'.

So why do we feel thin need to believe?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There are many mysteries that we humans will never be capable of unraveling. And even those we think we have unraveled, may still not be. So it's this notion of 'belief' that I find illogical. And somewhat dishonest. Even when we get an 'answer' we could simply accept its validity provisionally. We don't need to 'believe in' it. And when we have no apparent answer, we could just accept that it is a mystery. And again, no need to 'believe'.

So why do we feel thin need to believe?

Never say never, else your belief that you will never unravel certain mysteries will be self-fulfilling. I don't do belief, I either understand something or I don't yet.

 

[PureX]

Never say never, else your belief that you will never unravel certain mysteries will be self-fulfilling. I don't do belief, I either understand something or I don't yet.

But how do you know you understand it? How can you know you're not wrong?

For thousands of years humans believed they knew that the Earth was essentially flat, because that idea of it functioned according to their experience of it without error.

So how do we know what we believe we know, now? Again, it's because our current ideas of what is real and true function via our experience of things. But we have been wrong many times in the past based on this 'experience of it' criteria. So itwould be both honest and reasonable to presume tgat we are still quite wrong in our presumptions of reality and truth. And that we have no way of knowing about which presumptions we are wrong. So they should all be suspect.

But whenever I bring any of this up, people universally want to fight against it. They do not want to acknowledge that their limitations are so profound tgat they could be wrong about anything and everything at any time.

They much prefer to 'believe' they're right, even though it's illogical, and dishonest.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But how do you know you understand it? How can you know you're not wrong?

For thousands of years humans believed they knew that the Earth was essentially flat, because that idea of it functioned according to their experience of it without error.

So how do we know what we believe we know, now? Again, it's because our current ideas of what is real and true function via our experience of things. But we have been wrong many times in the past based on this 'experience of it' criteria. So itwould be both honest and reasonable to presume tgat we are still quite wrong in our presumptions of reality and truth. And that we have no way of knowing about which presumptions we are wrong. So they should all be suspect.

But whenever I bring any of this up, people universally want to fight against it. They do not want to acknowledge that their limitations are so profound tgat they could be wrong about anything and everything at any time.

They much prefer to 'believe' theyare right, even though it's illogical, and dishonest.

True understanding does not require a belief that you understand, it is real beyond thought. True, one can sometimes be mistaken, and as a result come to understand that one didn't understand. But then one continues to learn anew to more to truly understand. But understanding is not in time, it is not a mental process, it is a mental state.

Yes, I agree with you, most people are happy to believe they know certain things when they really do not truly understand.

 

[PureX]

True understanding does not require a belief that you understand, it is real beyond thought.

So is false understanding.

True, one can sometimes be mistaken, and as a result come to understand that one didn't understand. But then one continues to learn anew to more to truly understand. But understanding is not in time, it is not a mental process, it is a mental state.

It's a delusion. And we should acknowledge this even though we have to go with what we think we know until we know otherwise. It keeps us open to other and new possibilities.

Yes, I agree with you, most people are happy to believe they know certain things when they really do not truly understand.

And because they allow themselves this conceit, they tend to fight against any form of correction and become resolute in their ignorance. And this is very dangerous for everyone.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So is false understanding.

It's a delusion. And we should acknowledge this even though we have to go with what we think we know until we know otherwise. It keeps us open to other and new possibilities.

And because they allow themselves this conceit, they tend to fight against any form of correction and become resolute in their ignorance. And this is very dangerous for everyone.

They are all your beliefs, but that's ok, you are just expressing what and who you presently believe yourself to be.

 

[PureX]

They are all your beliefs, but that's ok, you are just expressing what and who you presently believe yourself to be.

I am presenting a course of logic based on common observations. I have posed no beliefs.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am presenting a course of logic based on common observations. I have posed no beliefs.

Fine line, but ok. So long as you apply all your present understanding to how you conduct your own life, then you can't go wrong. I mean that there will still be lots of misunderstanding, but you will not brush over them, so long as one applies feedback, any errors will be corrected. Btw, without detecting our own misunderstandings/errors, we will never develop true understanding. In that sense, making mistakes are essential to learning, ironic yes?

 

[Nakosis]

@Nakosis
Disbelief that there is anything physical and well as non-physical.
I mean I believe the universe is natural, but that is a sort of I trust in general my experinces to be real. Not that the universe is ontologically natural.

I can make use of the physical. I get the results from acceptance of the physical that I expect. This seems to happen independent of myself.

I was thinking however, "spiritual" beliefs can also work as expected, just not independently my self. So it may benefit me, but I don't see myself as alone in the world. Spirituality, the idea of a spiritual reality is useless when it comes to others. Also there are non-spiritual beliefs which work as as well as any spiritual explanations.
So everything is consistent, work as expected, and apparently works the same for everyone independent of my mind by accepting only a physical reality regardless if anything other than a physical reality exists.

IOW, one can exist fine without a belief in a spiritual reality. A physical reality forces its existence on you regardless of your belief in it.

 

[PureX]

Fine line, but ok. So long as you apply all your present understanding to how you conduct your own life, then you can't go wrong. I mean that there will still be lots of misunderstanding, but you will not brush over them, so long as one applies feedback, any errors will be corrected. Btw, without detecting our own misunderstandings/errors, we will never develop true understanding. In that sense, making mistakes are essential to learning, ironic yes?

I am a Taoist, so I have no expectation of understanding the great mystery of being. All I can do is 'go with the flow of it' as it swirls around me.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I can make use of the physical. I get the results from acceptance of the physical that I expect. This seems to happen independent of myself.

I was thinking however, "spiritual" beliefs can also work as expected, just not independently my self. So it may benefit me, but I don't see myself as alone in the world. Spirituality, the idea of a spiritual reality is useless when it comes to others. Also there are non-spiritual beliefs which work as as well as any spiritual explanations.
So everything is consistent, work as expected, and apparently works the same for everyone independent of my mind by accepting only a physical reality regardless if anything other than a physical reality exists.

IOW, one can exist fine without a belief in a spiritual reality. A physical reality forces its existence on you regardless of your belief in it.

Well, if we are to do this duality I use the words objective versus subjective, but subjective can be intersubjective.

 

[Rival]

I disbelieve in philosophical naturalism.

 

[Kathryn]

Why believe anything when we cannot know? Why not just accept that it is a mystery?

Sure, I can accept that like I've said, but I don't personally believe it. I could be wrong, I don't know, but I do have some pretty firm beliefs. One of those though is that God doesn't set up tests we're likely to fail, and this is one of those that falls under that category.

 

[Nakosis]

Well, if we are to do this duality I use the words objective versus subjective, but subjective can be intersubjective.

Isn't though, all subjective?

Objective means what? What you believe to exist independently of your self?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Isn't though, all subjective?

Objective means what? What you believe to exist independently of your self?

Well, it is simple in a way. If everything is me in the subjective sense as it depends on how I think and everything do as I think it should, then I can test that and figure out what is not subjective to me. I can then add using theory of mind and inferer that other humans also have subjectivity and we can share what we assume to be subjective or objective.
Objective in the most general way means having reality independent of the mind.

 

[Nakosis]

Well, it is simple in a way. If everything is me in the subjective sense as it depends on how I think and everything do as I think it should, then I can test that and figure out what is not subjective to me. I can then add using theory of mind and inferer that other humans also have subjectivity and we can share what we assume to be subjective or objective.
Objective in the most general way means having reality independent of the mind.

So objective is what you think other people ought to accept as existing independent of the mind?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So objective is what you think other people ought to accept as existing independent of the mind?

Yes, it is a bit more complex for real, true and facts as in some cases the subjective claims can be real, true and facts.