Discussion»Questions»Human Behavior» To believe or not to believe? That is the question. How do YOU decide what is true and what isn't? Your sources? What if they're bogus?
Belief is acceptance without evidence. Reliance upon faith to fill in gaps of what we don't understand with what we hope is true. Faith is the great cop out, an excuse to avoid thinking or evaluating evidence. I personally don't advocate this practice. I'd rather admit I don't know than follow someone else's delusion.
For me, the application of belief is inverse to the measure of the claim; i.e., if someone tells me they got a new puppy or they've won a few bucks in a card game, I have no issue with believing it without further investigation. But if someone tells me there is an invisible, omnipotent universal Creator who demands my obedience and praise, and will commit me to everlasting torment if I don't submit, I'm gonna need a whole lot more proof. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
This post was edited by Don Barzini at September 22, 2017 4:46 AM MDT
I can understand that Don. But you didn't really answer my question. Are there sources upon which you rely for getting the "truth" and if so what if they're bogus? How do you KNOW? Everything that is true cannot always be proven. Someone tells you "I love you". There is no proof of that. The person could be a consummate actor/actress and a trickster. So you take it on faith that what you are being told is true. You can say if someone is willing to die for you that proves love. Not necessarily. There could be many reasons..one of which could be that the person wants to be a martyr and well thought of so the sacrifice of self would not be selfless. It would be selfish. Now I admit that is an extreme example but as you've noticed we are living on the edges of extremes these days if not already in the abyss. What used to be logical/sensible/admirable no longer is. Anything goes. SIGH. Thank you for your reply and Happy First Day of Autumn Friday in the USA! :)
This post was edited by RosieG at September 22, 2017 4:51 AM MDT
I actually addressed the primary part of your question, "To believe or not to believe?...". My point being, belief is not my method.
As Jane says, I consult multiple sources for deeper questions of what is true or not. Corroboration. The accumulation of evidence. One is wise to keep their mind open to the presentation of new data.
As for love, as subjective as that is, I'd say the reciprocation of affection is strong evidence to it's truth.
In sum, I'd rather really understand than take anything on faith.
This post was edited by Don Barzini at September 22, 2017 5:59 AM MDT
Thank you for your reply. "To believe or not to believe" does not stand alone Don. That was simply the kickoff/setup to the core question which is how do you know whether or not your source is bogus? That is what the "to believe or not to believe" hinges upon. If the nature of the setup of the question was confusing to you that was not my intention. I usually use setups to get to the main part of my question which almost always is what it ends with.
I check multiple sources. In politics, for example, a person who watches only a single news outlet (such as MSNBC) will learn only one side of things and one viewpoint. I recall your outrage when I suggested you branch out a little, so I will refrain from doing that again.
Don Barzini 