"If we believe in something we don't have to think for ourselves do we?"

I just watched the anti Scientology documentary Going clear and a chap made the point of my thread title and I thought "wow this is apt for so many views and beliefs".
I have seen it so many times that belief just trumps evidence and the actual facts.
I will not aim this at any group seeing the group who I think the person made it about because even my views and beliefs to some will appear to be wrong.
So is it hard for some to think for themselves? or is it easier to just go with the flow?.
To me I weigh up the evidence for and against and make up my mind from there but do some just accept what they have been taught from a young age and just accept it?.
Forgive me for my inane ramblings....scotch.

Just rerad my OP...doesn't make sense to me even after a few mins .
Carry on all......scotch!.

I'll try and salvage this thread for you........


What brand of scotch?

a reply to: MisterSpock

Very cheap nasty stuff...all I can afford at the mo.
It is Scottish though!

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: MisterSpock

Very cheap nasty stuff...all I can afford at the mo.
It is Scottish though!

Well, your obviously enjoying it and that's what counts.

Your OP isn't as unreadable as you may think, I'm sure someone will chime in with something relevant(unlike myself).

People do find it easier to do things or believe things when someone else makes the decision for them. Couple that with not wanting to contradict those around them and stand out, and you have exactly the type of situation that can fuel even the most insane fires.

I recall reading something awhile ago that pointed out that even someone, in a group of people, that new the correct answer to a question that was asked would not speak out if the majority of those around them gave the incorrect answer.

So even when your "right" some people will just naturally go along with the group.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I think it makes sense.

If you follow a person, a idea, a dogma without question, you don't have to take responsibility for your actions or the actions of the others that adhere to your 'faith'. It is intellectually lazy - true not having to decide what actions to take but I also consider it cowardly.

People will do all manner of things that go against their personal conscious to belong to a group. I find it very sad but also very human. The need to belong and it is a fundamental need creates a system where you have to conform to the actions of the group whether you personally agree or not.

a reply to: boymonkey74

Me personally....i carry a very fluid interpretation of what "believe" is, and apply it in context to what i know at that specific moment. Or possibly use it as an anchor point for sessions of open minded, abstract thinking (i sometimes let my imagine run wild to find hidden insights).

But as I have seen it in my mom, who is a woman of fairly staunch faith, "belief" is more about keeping things uncomplicated. She has, at some point in life, thought things through to a point where she was comfortable considering them "solved", and a closed matter. Those are her beliefs. She doesn't typically challenge her beliefs because of a little bit of OCD she has with not having loose ends. She doesn't like mysteries, and works diligently to remove them from her thoughts, at least the most impactful mysteries are "solved" in her mind.

So as it pertains to religion...moving her viewpoints during discussion is difficult. Because if it unravels anything, she has to then spend time going back through and tidying it up in her own mind. She has become more and more resistant to this as she has gotten older.

I know of lots of people that did just that, they were told something as a child and they decided on believing it, sans questioning, it was 'sold' to them as advantageous, that there was rewards for being on 'their side' which essentially meant blaming an innocent for that which they didn't do and sticking to it for financial reward. Obviously they were acting unethically and hopefully karma will show them their injustice in a way that makes them renege on their ill gotten gains.

A certain facet of older generations are more inclined to such behaviour, they have rigid opinions that they have held for years such as 'not wearing a certain colour', 'not liking certain foods (even if never tried)', 'not travelling to certain lands', 'not swaying from their religious/political beliefs', 'not accepting those that have differing opinions to theirs' etc.

I work in art and education and I am also doing Postgrad study which involves research, I am naturally open minded and naturally inclined to higher order thinking which I really have to have when doing research as a lot of the theory I have to write about is new ground and untested, I have to think of multiple outcomes and long term strategy /effect.

In contrast, many from older generations were brought up as children and young adults under more didactic, behaviourist regimes where they were told ''this is how it is, learn it'', it stifled their faculties for critical analysis and free will thinking.

Education is moving forward these days, the teaching methodology is more cognitive with aspects of humanist /Gestaltism, which IMO only works when there is an equilibrium, there has to be an intelligent mixture from each end of the scale to enable factual knowledge as the basis for independent research and analysis.

Hence, hopefully emerging generations will be more able to analyse in a more open minded way.

However, the dynamics that underpin societies attitudes to learning, and cultural influences that affect education, have been continually shifted thanks to such factors as immigration and pop culture. So as educational theories and teaching practices become established based on a certain demographic, only to find within 5 years that demographic has significantly altered, it poses additional strains on education to adapt practices to account for the shift in the demographic, that the government that sets the education standards didn't account for. Education playing catch up to government policy should not be the modus operandi.

Ah yes, I spent many a night myself consumed by some cheap and nasty Scotch.

For the life of me I can't remember her name, but she was great fun!


Anyways, I tend to agree that holding beliefs and sticking to them rigidly is a form of intellectual laziness.

Bigfurrytexan made an interesting point regarding getting to a point of inquiry and when finding yourself comfortable considering any queries 'solved' and remaining at that comfortable point. I think most people are in that category one way or the other.

Religion, which is a codified system of belief encourages/enforces this cessation of enquiry and to keep things simple discourages questioning and celebrates blind acceptance. Which IMHO is a crime against humanity but it keeps many many people snug in their simplistic viewpoints so it is popular. Being popular doesn't mean it is right however. To have a framework in which the one who believes absolutely the most outlandish craziness is lauded as some sort of 'leading light' is quite frankly ridiculous and embarrassing for humanity.

I am constantly amused and a bit saddened by the contradictions that lie happily together in the minds of 'believers' and generally religious forums (along with drunk crazy Scottish women) I avoid like a biblical plague.

So yes, intellectual laziness it is (combined with fear).


Hows that cheap whisky goin down my friend?


'Carefully pulls cork from 21 year old single malt, and pours gently swirling rhythmically releasing tantalising peaty heather aromas, before softly tasting and sitting back as a symphony of earthy flavour dances on my tongue and the tingle of alcohol tickles my moist lips
Oh yes,can't beat a drop of Scotch.

a reply to: boymonkey74

One of my favorites...

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

I don't believe, I entertain thoughts. Every consecutive thought about the same topic will either support, refute or have no bearing at all on where I last left off.

a reply to: HumansEh

Good post the scotch is gone and now I have to drink cider..
I semi quit ATS due to my infamous status but got drawn back due to booze.

God bless booze.

I saw a wonderful bumper sticker once:

Don't believe everything you think.

LOL

a reply to: boymonkey74

I favour thinking for myself, and having faith as well. It is not weakness of mind to have faith, but to ignore reason and excuse oneself from the responsibility one has when one knows how to reason, that is weakness of mind.

And when I say that a person who has the capacity to reason has a responsibility to do so, I mean that in the most serious possible manner. Human beings have a unique ability within the arc of life on this planet. We can record our history, and learn from the transition from past to present. We can apply logic to what we know of recorded history, and using that logic, assemble for ourselves understanding of what it is that will take our species forward, and what it is that will hold it back.

That gives each of us immense power over the future of this species. We can know, by applying reason and learning from the histories of our species, how best to ensure our descendants futures are better than our past. Whether we use that reason, whether we act on that understanding, and promote balance, some manner of harmony, some sort of compassion and empathy amongst the many peoples walking the world or not as a result of our understanding, is a CHOICE we make.

Those who understand how to reason, should know that in reality, it is not those who have faith in general, but more particularly, those who use their faith to excuse ignorance, who endanger the future of the species. With love and knowledge though, with compassion enabled by wisdom, many great things are possible. Fail in either particular however, and our species may collapse upon itself. In either case, we absolutely MUST think for ourselves, faithful or not.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I believe any Brit with arms bigger than Jessie Ventura who's had too much scotch. It's a lot less painful than thinking for myself.

On the other hand facts and evidences can be false, so blind believe/lack of thought often involve "facts" too.

a reply to: mkpetrov

Fabulous Avatar mkpetrov!! Well Done!!