Why facts fail to reach the faithful, (even the intelligent ones)

by done4good 51 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  DJS

  d4g,

  Nice response to one of our resident Feeler/Perceivers. In addition to Maslow, we have used the Myers Briggs Personality Indicator (MBPTI) to illustrate the evolutionary trek of humans. MBPTI reveals that nearly half of the population has a Guardian personality, which is exactly what we would expect when we look in our rear view mirror closely at how humans evolved.

  But MBPTI and Maslow are tools to help us understand- they aren't and do not present themselves as definitive rock solid science. As I've pointed out before, the only thing humans require or need to Believe is to Feel. Beliefs and Emotions are tied together with steel cables; that's why they are so hard to break. The frightened herd responding powerfully and suddenly based on a trigger that may or may not be a threat, is a powerful tool as well to understand how we evolved. Humans were no different; for most of our 100,000 year history, those who could respond quickly and powerfully to real or perceived threats were more likely to live and pass on DNA.

  Those feeling/perceiving traits served us well for thousands of years. Today? Not so much. Studies suggest the Feeler/Perceivers are at the lowest rung of income earners today, while the Rationals - those Intuitive Thinkers - are at the top.

  This suggests we are evolving as a species. The planet is much more complicated today. Whether it is the economy, global military strategy and capabilities, or climate change, the problems today are real and responding emotionally to them will ensure that nothing positive is accomplished in addressing them. We need rational people who demand evidence to keep us from doing permanent harm to our species. So at least evolutionarily speaking we are headed in the right way. The $64 question is are we heading there fast enough.

  Based on the Feeler/Perceivers and those led and driven by their emotions on this site and around the world, I would say no. And these beady eyed little vermin breed a lot faster than the rest of us too.
• 

  LisaRose

  Heeyyyy, don't knock us feelers DJS, we have our uses, lol.

  But even I don't get fisherman's points. Like just because someone write down that a horse talked thousands of years ago it must be true and that is evidence of God? Come on. How many JWs believe they have experienced demonic activity, when even what happened was quite easily explained by a more rational person? Sadly, people are quite easily fooled.

  People believe what they want to believe, what fits their need to believe, they don't let pesky facts get in the way, that's why logic on its own will never convince a believer.
• 

  DJS

  LisaRose,

  YOU are a very special Feeler/Perceiver. Of course there is much more to personality types, and each type has its strengths and weaknesses. The data only suggests correlations over large populations. If the survey had been taken 15,000 years ago, the Feeler/Perceivers would have ruled!!!!I

  It's evolution, albeit by a very slow process. The 'fittest' today are more often those who can think analytically and rationally and understand and require evidence for the decision making process. That may not make them a greater % of the population for a long time, but it at the very least is more likely to place them in decision making positions.
• 

  done4good

  DJS-

  Good points about MBTI, yet another framework that helps us understand human behaviors. I left this one out of the discussion so far, but thanks for bringing it in.

  My wife is a Guardian type, (ESFJ). Many other guardian types, (ISTJ, for example), are thinking personalities, and it does happen that sensory/observant types are often thinking types, (more so than intuitive types, which are usually feeling). Intuitive thinkers, (rationals), are the rarest, at about 7% of the population. We are rare, and there is an over-representation of us on this board, (mine is INTJ). I have hypothesized this correlation has a lot to do with why we left to begin with.
  

  d4g
  
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  good science never uses the word "truth" - absolutely.

  Science uses the words 'correct' and 'facts'.

  When data are used in support of a conclusion, scientists are trained to be very hesitant over using words like 'shows' or 'proof'. It is intellectually honest to use words like 'suggests' ...
• 

  DJS

  d4g,

  "I have hypothesized this correlation has a lot to do with why we left to begin with."

  Yes, we have discussed this previously on this site. I'm an ENTJ. It is a predicted outcome. Intuition, it appears, is an advantage in today's world when it is coupled with Thinking. When it is coupled with Feeling, Houston, we may have a problem. The contributing factors for those who leave religion, become irreligious, a-relgious or atheist are: Intelligence, Personality Type, Education, Prosperity and Culture.

  Culture is a contamination factor that skews all data, as Muslims aren't likely to lose their religion because they might also lose their head in the process. And dubs lose their families. And so on. The other 4 are the real factors. Prosperity seems to be a minor factor (look at the US as an example).

  Intelligent people are more likely atheist or irreligious, as are Rationals and those with Graduate and Post Graduate Education (as they are exposed to the analytical, empirical evidence process). Lots of empirical studies suggest these correlations. But again class, these are nothing other than correlations; there is not a cause/effect.

  
  
• 

  LisaRose

  YOU are a very special Feeler/Perceiver. Of course there is much more to personality types, and each type has its strengths and weaknesses. The data only suggests correlations over large populations. If the survey had been taken 15,000 years ago, the Feeler/Perceivers would have ruled!!!!I

  Actually I am fairly close to the middle when it comes to feeler/thinker. But I don't agree that being a feeler makes you necessarily unable to use logic, nor are people who are very far to the thinking side make better decisions in my experience, and I have known a few. At the very least, their extreme lack of attention to the feelings of others make them very difficult to work with. I worked with an ISTJ who was extreme in all four qualities. Her communication skills were terrible and she sometimes missed huge red flags because she was so focused on productivity, she didn't see the forest for the trees. She was also pretty annoying to be around.

  But most people are not extremely one side or the other, and I believe the ideal is to use the thinking side of your brain when it's required, but to temper that with attention to emotions, when that is needed. I do think feelers can learn to be more logical, and thinkers can learn some emotional intelligence and culture and education can have a big influence.

  I do think there will always be a place for feelers, even as the world skews towards and rewards more rational types. Even if religion fades away, and I think it will, we still need artists, musicians and healers, and I think we feelers will always be drawn to those professions.
• 

  DJS

  LisaRose,

  There will always be a place for every personality type. None of them are right or wrong. They just have different strengths and weaknesses. Right now the planet needs a lot of help with rational thought based on evidence. If that changes and Grog the caveman in all of his emotional, reactive, fight or flight glory is required, rationals will not fare so well.
• 

  LisaRose

  I agree, but we seem to be going the other way lately, away from rational thought, not towards it.
• 

  done4good

  LisaRose - I agree, but we seem to be going the other way lately, away from rational thought, not towards it.

  I think that there has always been a backlash to rational thinking. Take the Scopes' Monkey Trials, The US Civil War, the backlash to civil rights movement, etc. as evidence of that. The current political divide in the US and folks such as the "climate deniers" in the USA are current examples. These people do not represent the majority, but rather an, (often very), vocal minority. Their more vocal approach makes sense, because rather than using facts, they rely primarily on emotion, to make their point. Factual lines of argument are by nature, dispassionate.
  

  I think this would be an excellent topic for a new OP, btw.

  d4g