--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My sense is that the appeal or lack thereof of a > > particular belief comes first, and evaluation > > second; and that the evaluation is designed to > > reinforce or reject the belief on the basis of > > whether it does or does not have appeal to the > > individual. > > > > When we reject a long-held belief, it's not so > > much because we have evaluated it objectively > > and found it wanting, as it is because something > > about the belief has ceased to have the appeal > > it once held for us. In such a case we're likely > > to choose evaluation criteria stringent enough > > to give us a rational basis for rejecting the > > belief, but in fact the rejection has already > > taken place. > > > > And vice-versa, of course. > > > This is really interesting. It is one of our cognitive weak spots. > Evaluating something objectively seems like more of an ideal goal > than what goes on in our lives.
Indeed. > To give a personal example, my POV shift on belief in God happened > when I went from assuming its reality to asking the question, "Why > do I believe?" I had reasons, but I had not really examined them > in the direction of objectivity. What triggered your asking that question? My belief was a forgone conclusion and then > I found reasons to support it. The shift of my POV which asked more > honestly what my reasons were came when I was able to even > contemplate that I might be wrong. It isn't always easy to get to > a position on strong personal beliefs where you are really able to > actually make it falsifiable. Once I was able to face the > possibility emotionally that I might be wrong, I was able to > examine my belief structure and make some decisions about whether > or not I wanted to continue the belief. The way you've set it out here, it sounds as if you're saying the belief was just as strong when you began to question it as it had been previously. I'm not sure that's the case. I think the belief had become less appealing before the need to face the possibility that you might be wrong ever came up for you. On some level, you already knew the belief was no longer serving you; the reasons why you had held the belief had become inoperative. I don't mean to suggest that all the pondering and evaluating weren't eminently worthwhile, BTW, even if they did take place after the fact. I just think shifts in belief--especially metaphysical beliefs--tend to happen way beneath the level of conscious awareness, and that consciously evaluating the beliefs just brings the intellect in line with what we already have recognized on a deeper level. The evaluation is a very necessary and often difficult process, and neglecting it can leave things in a real mess. But it may be that the beginnings of the mess are what bring the issue to the surface in the first place, like an itch that demands to be scratched. (Just to be sure it's clear, I think this is the case with everyone, not just you by any means. But unlike many people, you've been willing to closely examine the process.)
