It's been a long time since I've posted anything, probably since I've been in the process of becoming an ex-exJW but lately I've been getting more emails from family inquiring about my beliefs or lack thereof, and often sending the latest rags, no doubt to lift my day . So, I thought I'd draft a letter to send to my Mom, with the intention of letting her see a glimpse of my state of mind, and hopefully ease her mind some to see that I'm not in despair or plagued by feelings of guilt. I'll post the one part of her letter first that's relevant and then my response.
If you can put on your old JW thinking cap back on for a moment(you know that one that was way too tight), I'm just looking for some feedback here on how she might react or respond.
Here's her's:
Did you get the material I sent you? I hope that you did and that you
will give it your full attention. What else is there, ----? Where did
you learn answers to important questions except for the truth you
learned earlier in life? Search out your douibts, clear them up, please.
We are enjoying so many good things with the cong. and with the people
we're studying with. There's nothing else out there in the world, is
there? Child rearing(tho' your Dad and I were quite stupid about it
until we got to -----). Things are a lot worse since yoiu were a
child-- kids talking about sex before they're ten yeards old. Oh, it's
going on down here so why not your way, too. I worry about ------
Here's mine:
I did get the material you sent me, but I'd rather discuss things with you directly if that's Ok. There are lots we've never talked about, both when I was growing up, and now as adults, but I suppose that's all part of a "normal" family dynamic if there is such a thing. It’s interesting you mentioned doubts and how I should clear them up. Of course, while not an altogether pleasant condition, doubt is a necessary tool if we are to be kept from accepting as gospel all manner of fantastical claims, whether they be financial, scientific, or religious in nature.
For instance, you could say the entire scientific method is based on doubt. The best scientific experiments are designed to take out human biases since as one scientist put it “Smart people (like smart lawyers) can come up with very good explanations for mistaken points of view“. Many experiments may be needed to test the validity of a hypothesis and need to be retested by other researchers, again implying doubt but still working toward testing whether or not its predictions are born out by the results of the experiment. Of course, there are good reasons for all this doubt, as scientists have human biases like everyone else. An individual scientist may leave out or ignore data that doesn’t support his interpretation of the results. In that case, there may be a psychological tendency to find "something wrong", such as systematic effects, with data which does not support his expectations, while data which does agree with his expectations may not be checked as carefully. As you can imagine, he may not enjoy having his work being checked over by other researchers looking for errors in his methodology, but if he wants to have his theory accepted and get some credit for it from his peers, this is how it must be done. But the whole purpose of this method is to increase mankind’s knowledge of how nature works and in doing so demonstrates how we know what we know. Ok, I will get to my point sometime...
While I am not a scientist by any stretch of the imagination, my work does use some of the same methods in problem solving. Everyday brings new problems which require a systematic approach to identify and either repair or devise new ways of doing things. Sometimes I may think I know how something works, or why it doesn’t work, and start my testing from that point. But if my testing shows otherwise, I have to quickly look for other reasons and mull over other possible scenarios to account for the data I am seeing. If I do not leave myself open to the possibility of being wrong, and remain confident that my initial assessment of the problem was the correct one no matter what my data is telling me, I would be fortunate to hold on to any job in my field for very long. So while I always leave myself open to the idea that I can be wrong (back to the doubt issue again), I’m confident in the process that can lead me to a more accurate understanding. That process involves certain standards of proof, logic and argument that can weed out unsubstantiated beliefs and save a lot of wasted time and effort. Now I mentioned beliefs because it’s something I’m sure you’re concerned about, albeit beliefs of an entirely different nature.
When we talk about religious beliefs, usually for most people it's those things they learned as a young child that they hold most dear. I'm sure you've noticed this yourself when you ask people about their beliefs (i.e. a diehard Catholic that has an emotional attachment to one of the sacraments) and is also the reason that whatever religion one is born into, that is likely the one they stay with for the rest of their lives. Perhaps because those beliefs, whatever they are, serve as part of their identity and give them a sense of community. To challenge those beliefs takes a lot of courage since it's like tearing away at their own self, threatening their ties to family and/or community, and all without guaranteeing they will be replaced by something better. Since I already mentioned Catholics, I'll use one as an example. You've probably met one that is well aware of all the issues surrounding the problem with pedophile priests, the widespread pervasiveness of the problem and the attempted cover-ups of the Church to deal with it. But they have still have faith that God will correct the problem because their church is “God’s Church”.
In this case, would you admire their faith? Would you respect the fact that they have pushed aside any doubts of their faith that the revelation (irony intended) of this problem might have created? Perhaps you would get the feeling that no matter what happened they could never give up the belief in their church. They may seem to you to be perfectly rational in other ways, able to hold down a job, raise a family, drive on the right side of the road, walk not run with scissors, but in this one area, their emotional bond with their beliefs has prevented them from seeing what probably seems so crystal clear to you.
On the other hand, what if in spite of their feelings of loyalty to the church, pressure from family, and uncertainty about where their questioning may take them, they have come to the conclusion that they had put their faith in an entirely human organization with entirely human leaders with entirely human motivations? You can be sure that if they were sincere in their previous beliefs, this would not be easy, and not without emotional pain from realizing they had been duped, followed by some feelings of resentment.
In each of these scenarios, was the person better served by doubt or faith?
Which person would garner more respect from you?