PsychoSarah
Chaotic Neutral
I have been trying to believe for the past 6 years. Clearly, "will to believe" isn't the only deciding factor
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You can't choose immediately to believe in anything, but there is some degree of freedom involved in opening yourself up to things. You know, angry conservatives who label liberals as the devil rather than consider what they're saying. Same with theists and atheists. In this sense there is definitely a "will to believe."
I have been trying to believe for the past 6 years. Clearly, "will to believe" isn't the only deciding factor
I'd like to start a discussion on how we make decisions. Some people decide based on facts alone. Others decide based on how they feel. Still others decide by weighing the feelings of others higher than their own. I'm sure there are other ways that people decide on something, and for most of us it's probably a mixture of methods.
What is puzzling to me lately is the fact that there are folks who maintain that the way *they* decide is the only "right" way. Is there one right way to decide something? If so, who/what determines what this way is? Or is there one right way per individual?
Lots of questions, but I don't have answers. Any takers?
That does seem the way that Received's threads have gone.No, quatona is not correct. I am not interested in justifying my beliefs, religious or otherwise.
On that subject, I was looking into hypnosis, as an alternative treatment for chronic pain (not my own).This topic was started so that we could discuss how decisions are made. As the discussion moved along it became clear (to me) that decisions form beliefs, and that we believe something because we've decided to (whether it's a conscious decision or not). If someone is hung up on the view that decisions form beliefs, then they should just stick to the "decisions" part of the topic and voice an opinion on how decisions are formed, e.g., does evidence always trump everything else, do emotions play a role, what if the emotions conflict with the evidence, etc.
This is a philosophical discussion - not a justification of my positions on things.
I have been trying to believe for the past 6 years. Clearly, "will to believe" isn't the only deciding factor
you're right. and men will constantly confuse you, take advantage of you, hurt you, deceive you, and all the while say they are right. !!!! men / mankind is horrible !!
"man" even does exactly what Yahshua said about men: they " go across oceans and deserts to make ONE convert, and that convert becomes seven times as bad a son of the devil as themselves."
and they brag about this ! and still think that they are doing GOOD!
You can't choose immediately to believe in anything, but there is some degree of freedom involved in opening yourself up to things. You know, angry conservatives who label liberals as the devil rather than consider what they're saying. Same with theists and atheists. In this sense there is definitely a "will to believe."
There is also definitely the ability in humans for self-deception. This is where the evidence come into play. For instance, there is no objective evidence for the existence of gods, yet still many believe in them. How does that work?
With the exception of the few suspected trolls active on this site, I take this all seriously.Totally relevant.
Try this Google: not taking things arbitrarily seriously.
Well, this is the Philosophy forum, and not Exploring Christianity forum. If you were looking for an echo chamber, or more insulated environment, perhaps, in all seriousness, this is the wrong forum for you.Or another: throwing down provocative statements and expecting serious answers.
I disagree with your example of self-deception. There is no objective evidence for the existence of God, but there is no objective evidence against His existence either. I think self deception would be where there was evidence against the existence of God, yet you still believed in Him. Without evidence either way we must turn to other means to make our decision about Him.There is also definitely the ability in humans for self-deception. This is where the evidence come into play. For instance, there is no objective evidence for the existence of gods, yet still many believe in them. How does that work?
I disagree with your example of self-deception. There is no objective evidence for the existence of God, but there is no objective evidence against His existence either. I think self deception would be where there was evidence against the existence of God, yet you still believed in Him. Without evidence either way we must turn to other means to make our decision about Him.
Indeed.I disagree with your example of self-deception. There is no objective evidence for the existence of God,
While this is a laughable response in a philosophy forum, even here, we can easily deal with this. Define "God".but there is no objective evidence against His existence either.
This is where the rubber meets the road, philosophically, and psychologically, speaking.I think self deception would be where there was evidence against the existence of God, yet you still believed in Him.
What are these "other means"?Without evidence either way we must turn to other means to make our decision about Him.
They would include the examples I provided in the OP (and I'm sure others).What are these "other means"?
You have no definition for "God"?Indeed.
While this is a laughable response in a philosophy forum, even here, we can easily deal with this. Define "God".
Keep in mind that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, where evidence should be expected.
This is where the rubber meets the road, philosophically, and psychologically, speaking.
If you were presented evidence that conflicted with your belief in God, would you stop believing, as I did, with Santa and crop circles?
Or would you, as described in the articles that bhsmte and I linked to, internally rationalize the problems away?
What are these "other means"?
With that, in the context of this thread, you have lumped "God" in with "Santa".They would include the examples I provided in the OP (and I'm sure others).
With the exception of the few suspected trolls active on this site, I take this all seriously.
Well, this is the Philosophy forum, and not Exploring Christianity forum. If you were looking for an echo chamber, or more insulated environment, perhaps, in all seriousness, this is the wrong forum for you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?