How do you know for sure that someone believes a god exists?

[ebia]

Please read the OP again:

Many people make the claim that a god exists. But how can we be sure they really do believe a god exists? Perhaps they are putting on a facade. Perhaps they have been duped or indoctrinated such that their belief isn't truly voluntary.

A belief is still a belief, even if came from false information or indoctrination.

Other than that, you've got no way of absolutely verifying anything people say about their internal state. Live with it.

If they make choices that are personally costly that support what they claim to believe, that's pretty strong evidence.
But until someone makes a perfect lie detector you can't absolutely detect the perfect liar.

On the other hand, that applies to individuals. The idea that everyone who claims belief is lying is preposterous.

 

[Davian]

A belief is still a belief, even if came from false information or indoctrination.

Other than that, you've got no way of absolutely verifying anything people say about their internal state. Live with it.

If they make choices that are personally costly that support what they claim to believe, that's pretty strong evidence.
But until someone makes a perfect lie detector you can't absolutely detect the perfect liar.

On the other hand, that applies to individuals. The idea that everyone who claims belief is lying is preposterous.

But possible. Everyone (or many) around you that claims to believe may be only keeping up a front, due to the social implications of "coming out". An entertaining thought.

 

[ebia]

But possible.

so statistically unlikely as to be, to all intents and purposes, impossible.

 

[bhsmte]

On the other hand, that applies to individuals. The idea that everyone who claims belief is lying is preposterous.

I completely agree.

Most people who claim to believe in a God most likely do, with a smaller percentage who claim to believe, could do so because of social pressures and or avoid being outcast for being a non believer.

 

[TheImmortalJellyfish]

Many people make the claim that a god exists. But how can we be sure they really do believe a god exists? Perhaps they are putting on a facade. Perhaps they have been duped or indoctrinated such that their belief isn't truly voluntary.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it doesn't matter what you think I think. Does it matter what I think YOU think?

 

[Kylie]

Many people make the claim that a god exists. But how can we be sure they really do believe a god exists? Perhaps they are putting on a facade. Perhaps they have been duped or indoctrinated such that their belief isn't truly voluntary.

You can only ever be reasonably sure about your own belief.

 

[Davian]

so statistically unlikely as to be, to all intents and purposes, impossible.

Ridiculous. It is entirely possible. It's not like you can demonstrate that gods exist, even to another believer. Correct?

 

[Albion]

Most people who claim to believe in a God most likely do, with a smaller percentage who claim to believe, could do so because of social pressures and or avoid being outcast for being a non believer.

And with that, a thread that probably never deserved to see the light of day is put to rest.

 

[True Scotsman]

I would agree with something along those lines: a person's actions, choices, words and language, can be supporting evidence to back their claim concerning a belief, or lack of belief for that matter. However definitively PROVING they actually "had the belief", or didn't have the belief ? I don't think it definitively proves it. It supports and corroborates it, but doesn't definitively prove it. Even the person who ultimately gives their life for the cause, could still arguably be doing it for some other reason.

That's true. I agree.

 

[talquin]

A belief is still a belief, even if came from false information or indoctrination.

True. But we could still divide all beliefs by:

1) Derived through the truth
2) Derived through something other than the truth

Other than that, you've got no way of absolutely verifying anything people say about their internal state. Live with it.

Not always true. One's actions can often show what they believe. For example, if one truly believed that heaven were a better place than their temporal life and that they would go there, then they wouldn't go to extreme lengths to prolong their temporal life.

 

[talquin]

Yes, I understood it. You could always change it or clarify your real intent, of course.

Are you trying to say that one who has been duped or indoctrinated into believing something holds such a belief voluntarily?

 

[ebia]

Ridiculous. It is entirely possible. It's not like you can demonstrate that gods exist, even to another believer. Correct?

Whether God exists isn't the point.
Most of the world's population claim to believe in some kind of God.
They could all be wrong.
But the probability they are all lying is vanishingly small.

Peer pressure certainly cannot begin to explain that level of claim, remembering that:
Peer pressure never works on everyone
That there are plenty of groups where there is no peer pressure to remain
That there are plenty of people who no longer believe but say that they once did
That there are plenty of people holding to belief despite pressure not to.

No.

The possibility that any given individual is lying exists.
But the probability that they all are is vanishingly small.

Let's say 10^-3500000000

 

[ebia]

True. But we could still divide all beliefs by:

1) Derived through the truth
2) Derived through something other than the truth

So what? It's still a genuine belief.

Not always true. One's actions can often show what they believe. For example, if one truly believed that heaven were a better place than their temporal life and that they would go there, then they wouldn't go to extreme lengths to prolong their temporal life.

that presupposes a whole lot of other stuff - not a well thought through test

 

[bhsmte]

Whether God exists isn't the point.
Most of the world's population claim to believe in some kind of God.
They could all be wrong.
But the probability they are all lying is vanishingly small.

I think the lie factor is much higher in the United States, where you are viewed as non trustworthy, if you are a non believer.

Could also be why, those who claim to be Christian is also so high in the United States, because a portion of those, just go along to fit in.

In most other parts of the world, I think the lie factor is much smaller.

 

[TillICollapse]

Whether God exists isn't the point.
Most of the world's population claim to believe in some kind of God.
They could all be wrong.
But the probability they are all lying is vanishingly small.

Would you view denial as a form of lying, or purposeful falsehood perhaps ?

 

[ebia]

Would you view denial as a form of lying, or purposeful falsehood perhaps ?

What do you mean by denial?

 

[bhsmte]

Would you view denial as a form of lying, or purposeful falsehood perhaps ?

My two cents.

Denial used excessively to confirm a belief, would be more along the lines of self deception to protect the belief, vs outright lying.

In some, protecting the belief is more important than acknowledging well evidenced realities, if those realities threaten the belief. When it becomes too painful to acknowledge the realities, defense mechanisms take over, to protect the belief and to keep convincing the self, I am right about this.

 

[TillICollapse]

What do you mean by denial?

The psychological phenomena.

 

[TillICollapse]

My two cents.

Denial used excessively to confirm a belief, would be more along the lines of self deception to protect the belief, vs outright lying.

In some, protecting the belief is more important than acknowledging well evidenced realities, if those realities threaten the belief. When it becomes too painful to acknowledge the realities, defense mechanisms take over, to protect the belief and to keep convincing the self, I am right about this.

I'd agree with everything you've stated, however for me personally, I'm not entirely sure there isn't a point in which a person in denial isn't indistinguishable from someone who is knowingly and deliberately perpetuating falsehoods (i.e. lying), regardless of the reason behind doing so.

I think in order to remain in denial and have it at least be somewhat successful for the person, that person can't see the reflection clearly, so to speak. They have to keep looking away, plugging their ears, turning their eyes from looking directly at what may dissolve the web. They cannot catch their own tail, otherwise they may realize it's their tail they have been chasing, as it were. So they can't directly catch their tail, they can't look in the mirror, they can't actually accept what may be truth and examine it critically, because to do so would also cause them to become responsible for the web of denial, amongst other things (including facing the pain, or whatever is being protected, etc). But if a person catches their tail, or catches a glimpse of what may be truth and bring the denial to nothing ... and in so doing realizes they are perpetuating wishful thinking, or outright falsehoods, etc ... and continues to do so, I'm not sure if that isn't "lying" at that point.

 

[bhsmte]

I'd agree with everything you've stated, however for me personally, I'm not entirely sure there isn't a point in which a person in denial isn't indistinguishable from someone who is knowingly and deliberately perpetuating falsehoods (i.e. lying), regardless of the reason behind doing so.

I think in order to remain in denial and have it at least be somewhat successful for the person, that person can't see the reflection clearly, so to speak. They have to keep looking away, plugging their ears, turning their eyes from looking directly at what may dissolve the web. They cannot catch their own tail, otherwise they may realize it's their tail they have been chasing, as it were. So they can't directly catch their tail, they can't look in the mirror, they can't actually accept what may be truth and examine it critically, because to do so would also cause them to become responsible for the web of denial, amongst other things (including facing the pain, or whatever is being protected, etc). But if a person catches their tail, or catches a glimpse of what may be truth and bring the denial to nothing ... and in so doing realizes they are perpetuating wishful thinking, or outright falsehoods, etc ... and continues to do so, I'm not sure if that isn't "lying" at that point.

It is a fine line between protecting a belief someone truly has with denial etc., and or realizing it is likely false and holding onto to it anyway.

IMO, you can tell by behaviors. A person that is pretending to go along with the crowd, is not going to get near as defensive, as the person that truly needs to believe their faith is true. Why? Because the first person doesn't have a psychological need to believe what they claim, their need is more socially driven and they know they are playing along and really have nothing to protect. The person who has a certain faith belief, that is threatened with well evidenced reality, will be much more defensive, because that threat hits them deep in their psyche.

Some of the posters on this board are excellent examples of cognitive dissonance in play. When someone makes entirely too much sense with a point that threatens their belief, the discomfort starts and the defense mechanisms go into full bore mode; denial, confirmation bias, etc... These folks, can't really even tell themselves they may be wrong, which is why the defense mechanisms are always in play to hold off the threat.