Can you make yourself believe something?

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-02-12 11:59pm

This has come up twice for me recently, once here in my discussion with Superman, and once on another board with Zadius. Apparently, some people honestly have no control over their beliefs; I was astonished to discover this for several reasons: I've always been under the impression (probably because of my evangelical upbrining) religion is a choice; I've made decisions about religion in the past; I can "switch off" Christianity as I please (I've tried it before; I just say to myself, "Let's see what it's like not to believe in God", and do it), and turn it back on again; and I've made decisions about other emotional attachments, like love.

So, am I an aberration, or in self-denial? Can you make yourself believe something?

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2006-02-13 12:53am

Just out of curiousity, what did Zadius have to say about all of this?

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2006-02-13 01:00am

Surlethe wrote:This has come up twice for me recently, once here in my discussion with Superman, and once on another board with Zadius. Apparently, some people honestly have no control over their beliefs; I was astonished to discover this for several reasons: I've always been under the impression (probably because of my evangelical upbrining) religion is a choice; I've made decisions about religion in the past; I can "switch off" Christianity as I please (I've tried it before; I just say to myself, "Let's see what it's like not to believe in God", and do it), and turn it back on again; and I've made decisions about other emotional attachments, like love.

So, am I an aberration, or in self-denial? Can you make yourself believe something?

Like Darth Wong said in another thread it has something to do with your conditioning. Your life experiences have conditioned you to be able to do that...to make it easy as an everyday decision. For others it's many layers deep....obviously.

Medic · Post by **Medic** » 2006-02-13 01:21am

It's just an ability of the more rational part of the brain to take control and ignore more emotional urges and appeals.

Before learning about stuff like logic and evidence (instead of stand-alone claims and emotional appeal) I've believed in Christianity, or at least that there was a god and a good deal of conspiracy theories. Or at the very least I entertained such notions.

But with just a little bit of knowledge, I at least, can just stand back and say: "okay, this is probably bunk. I don't believe in it anymore, or at least, I should be more critical before just throwing my chips in with this or that."

"Getting them while they're young" (great example.... here) can have long lasting impacts, but they only go as far as an individual's ability to give differing points of view or ideas a fair shake. It takes a bit of detachment in my opinion.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-02-13 01:40am

I can't make myself believe anything that isn't true. Like, I can say I believe that there's a purple unicorn living in my ear, but I recoil from the idea of actually *believing* it. I can't see myself ever being immune to rational counter-arguments.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » 2006-02-13 01:56am

"There are FOUR lights"

dworkin · Post by **dworkin** » 2006-02-13 01:58am

After 12 beers I'll believe anything you say if it means it your round

And back in the day I'ld believe anything of a hot date. Especially redheads.

Medic · Post by **Medic** » 2006-02-13 02:09am

Urm, actually, all I really said was that it's possible to learn how to doubt some beliefs.

On the other hand, it would take a great deal of detachment to believe in something patently false like invisible animals. Doubt seems more intuitive than outright belief but I've not grown up with the type of conditioning discussed in Superman's thread either. I've grown up as my own person.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2006-02-13 02:27am

Surlethe wrote:This has come up twice for me recently, once here in my discussion with Superman, and once on another board with Zadius. Apparently, some people honestly have no control over their beliefs; I was astonished to discover this for several reasons: I've always been under the impression (probably because of my evangelical upbrining) religion is a choice; I've made decisions about religion in the past; I can "switch off" Christianity as I please (I've tried it before; I just say to myself, "Let's see what it's like not to believe in God", and do it), and turn it back on again; and I've made decisions about other emotional attachments, like love.

So, am I an aberration, or in self-denial? Can you make yourself believe something?

I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical about "turning off" a belief. It took me a while to deprogram myself and really stop believing in god; I certainly wasn't given a choice about belief in God in the first place. It was just something drilled into me since I could remember. Sure, I got confirmed, but that was just because everyone else in my class was. I didn't give two shits.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-02-13 03:04am

Surlethe wrote:Can you make yourself believe something?

No, but you can make yourself ignore facts that contradict a preferred belief. All fundies do this to a certain extent; I suspect that a lot of them know deep-down that there are facts out there which might shake their faith, which is why they are so hostile and paranoid about being "exposed" to such things.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2006-02-13 03:08am

Surlethe wrote:This has come up twice for me recently, once here in my discussion with Superman, and once on another board with Zadius. Apparently, some people honestly have no control over their beliefs; I was astonished to discover this for several reasons: I've always been under the impression (probably because of my evangelical upbrining) religion is a choice; I've made decisions about religion in the past; I can "switch off" Christianity as I please (I've tried it before; I just say to myself, "Let's see what it's like not to believe in God", and do it), and turn it back on again; and I've made decisions about other emotional attachments, like love.

So, am I an aberration, or in self-denial? Can you make yourself believe something?

Clearly an aberration!

Just kidding. I've enjoyed our conversation.

I don't understand what you mean by saying you can "switch off" emotional attachments like love. After being in a relationship, you might, for whatever reason, break up and just "turn off" your feelings? How old are you, if you don't mind...

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-02-13 04:48am

I think I missed something in my reply: the idea of 'truth'. I can't make myself ignore rational counter-arguments, and however much I might bluster and piss and moan, I'll never be able to handwave anything away until I look into it more.

If my idea of 'truth' had nothing to do with substantiation, I might be unshakable in any sort of belief. If I simply believed the Bible was the Word of God, for instance, I would probably be very difficult to shift from this position, since it's a totally baseless belief to start with.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2006-02-13 07:52am

Surlethe wrote:This has come up twice for me recently, once here in my discussion with Superman, and once on another board with Zadius. Apparently, some people honestly have no control over their beliefs; I was astonished to discover this for several reasons: I've always been under the impression (probably because of my evangelical upbrining) religion is a choice; I've made decisions about religion in the past; I can "switch off" Christianity as I please (I've tried it before; I just say to myself, "Let's see what it's like not to believe in God", and do it), and turn it back on again; and I've made decisions about other emotional attachments, like love.

So, am I an aberration, or in self-denial? Can you make yourself believe something?

Religion is only a choice if you've been brought up in a context favorable towards religion, or at least not condemning. None of us have been brought up encouraged to believe in invisible giant animals, so none of us could force ourselves to believe in them.

I don't believe for a minute that you really knew what it was like to not belive in a god when you "switched off" your Christianity. You probably subconsciously "knew" that there was a god. Lifelong patterns of behavior just can't be changed instantaneously.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2006-02-13 08:04am

I tried to make myself believe in Christianity again when I was twelve. The nature of mortality had just really hit me, and I got really bummed about it.

It didn't work. So I guess I can't.

drachefly · Post by **drachefly** » 2006-02-13 11:29am

I think that if two sides have roughly equal arguments and some of their evidence is questionable, a choice could be made to admit or deny this sketchy evidence.

Also, as previously mentioned, you have the choice to try to override preexisting conditioning (if you realize it exists).

If it really gets lopsided, though, I don't see room for a choice. There is only denial at that stage.

Also, I can see one choosing to act and operate one's conscious mind AS IF one believed something that one really knew was false.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2006-02-13 01:35pm

One thing I don't understand is how you could "turn off" a belief in Christianity, when part of the theology is that you will go to Hell for dissent. Later in their lives, some people actually find themselves in therapy for this, simply because the idea has been drilled so deeply that they fear it. Everyone is different, of course.

But to just "turn off" the belief? How strongly could you have believed in this stuff to begin with if you just "turn off" the idea of hell?

Magnetic · Post by **Magnetic** » 2006-02-13 01:51pm

I don't think one can use the idea of "evidence" in this case. . . . . . . .at least evidence as we know it. Let's just say for a moment that there IS a being out there that is far advanced from us (you may even call it a 'technological advancement'). The fact that this being's power can't be proven scientifically CAN mean that it doesn't exist, OR it can mean that in OUR current level of technology, we are UNABLE to view it scientifically because we haven't advanced in our knowledge eoungh.

In that case, the fact that WE have no proof of such a beings existance won't necessarily mean that it is unprovable (eventually, perhaps) or untrue.

Just my 2 cents.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-02-13 01:57pm

Magnetic wrote:I don't think one can use the idea of "evidence" in this case. . . . . . . .at least evidence as we know it. Let's just say for a moment that there IS a being out there that is far advanced from us (you may even call it a 'technological advancement'). The fact that this being's power can't be proven scientifically CAN mean that it doesn't exist, OR it can mean that in OUR current level of technology, we are UNABLE to view it scientifically because we haven't advanced in our knowledge eoungh.

In that case, the fact that WE have no proof of such a beings existance won't necessarily mean that it is unprovable (eventually, perhaps) or untrue.

Just my 2 cents.

Until there is sufficient evidence, though, there's no reason to believe that they are true and/or exist. Otherwise it's just wishful thinking at best, delusional insanity at worst.

Magnetic · Post by **Magnetic** » 2006-02-13 02:15pm

General Zod wrote:
Magnetic wrote:I don't think one can use the idea of "evidence" in this case. . . . . . . .at least evidence as we know it. Let's just say for a moment that there IS a being out there that is far advanced from us (you may even call it a 'technological advancement'). The fact that this being's power can't be proven scientifically CAN mean that it doesn't exist, OR it can mean that in OUR current level of technology, we are UNABLE to view it scientifically because we haven't advanced in our knowledge eoungh.

In that case, the fact that WE have no proof of such a beings existance won't necessarily mean that it is unprovable (eventually, perhaps) or untrue.

Just my 2 cents.
Until there is sufficient evidence, though, there's no reason to believe that they are true and/or exist. Otherwise it's just wishful thinking at best, delusional insanity at worst.

Perhaps. . . . . . . . . but it may be the same "delusional insanity" that once said that a heavier than air vehicle can fly, or the sound barrier can never be broken, etc. . . . .

All I'm saying is that, even though something can't be proven currently, doesn't necessarily make it untrue. And the proof, itself, doesn't give it it's true standing.

Magnetic · Post by **Magnetic** » 2006-02-13 02:16pm

Edit: .......that a heavier than air vehicle can NEVER fly.....

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-02-13 02:27pm

Magnetic wrote:
Until there is sufficient evidence, though, there's no reason to believe that they are true and/or exist. Otherwise it's just wishful thinking at best, delusional insanity at worst.

Perhaps. . . . . . . . . but it may be the same "delusional insanity" that once said that a heavier than air vehicle can fly, or the sound barrier can never be broken, etc. . . . .

All I'm saying is that, even though something can't be proven currently, doesn't necessarily make it untrue. And the proof, itself, doesn't give it it's true standing.[/quote]

I take it you didn't bother reading the bit in my post about "sufficient evidence"? Building a heavier than air vehicle that actually works constitutes putting forth sufficient evidence, for example.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2006-02-13 02:43pm

Magnetic wrote:Perhaps. . . . . . . . . but it may be the same "delusional insanity" that once said that a heavier than air vehicle can fly, or the sound barrier can never be broken, etc. . . . .

All I'm saying is that, even though something can't be proven currently, doesn't necessarily make it untrue. And the proof, itself, doesn't give it it's true standing.

1. An ellipsis is made of exactly three periods. Not five, not ten, not until you're tired of pressing the period key. Three.

2. Nothing outside of math can be "proven" beyond question. Your examples of vehicles heavier than air flying or the sound barrier being broken are inapplicable because those things were known to be possible based on current understanding of the laws of physics. The fact that claims of God's existence make no predictions with which they can be disproved alone is enough to declare them logically invalid.

Magnetic · Post by **Magnetic** » 2006-02-13 02:57pm

I understand what you all are saying. I'm just offering up a way of looking at it, even in it's non-provability. From our stand point, God IS unprovable. But then, that's why so many are interested in that which is labeled 'supernatural'. Although it can't be proven, it is a part of most cultures in the world. It's interesting WHY so many cultures developed a supernatural to believe in, . . . .when they probably didn't even have contact with outside people groups, yet they each formed their own mysticism to believe. Has there been a study as to why we (man) formed such beliefs? Is there something supernatural about it, or has man always been 'gullible' (each within their own culture)?

To be honest, I come at this thread from the angle of still calling myself a Christian, yet looking at the evidences of why a part of the Bible can't be true. I even argue against many of the doctrines of the Christian faith on christian forum boards, and they probably see me as a "lost soul". Am I? I just don't know. But that really isn't their call. . . . . or mine, really.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-02-13 03:01pm

Magnetic wrote:I understand what you all are saying. I'm just offering up a way of looking at it, even in it's non-provability. From our stand point, God IS unprovable. But then, that's why so many are interested in that which is labeled 'supernatural'. Although it can't be proven, it is a part of most cultures in the world.

So what's your point? If it's unprovable, there isn't really any point of trying to offer another viewpoint on it. You may as well do the same for Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

It's interesting WHY so many cultures developed a supernatural to believe in, . . . .when they probably didn't even have contact with outside people groups, yet they each formed their own mysticism to believe. Has there been a study as to why we (man) formed such beliefs? Is there something supernatural about it, or has man always been 'gullible' (each within their own culture)?

It's not that big of a mystery. Primitive man lacked a method of explaining how the universe worked, so they came up with fables involving gods and demons to explain natural functions. Later these were naturally supplanted by science as a verifiable and testible method.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-02-13 03:52pm

One defining characteristic of all religious faiths is that their deities resemble themselves. As one pundit put it, in a land of living triangles, God would have three sides.

That gives a pretty strong hint as to where belief in the supernatural comes from.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Can you make yourself believe something?

Can you make yourself believe something?

Re: Can you make yourself believe something?

Re: Can you make yourself believe something?

Re: Can you make yourself believe something?

Re: Can you make yourself believe something?

Re: Can you make yourself believe something?