by CPiolo 22 Replies latest jw friends
For those of you interested in why your rational arguments and reasoning, in addition to well documented information do little to sway the beliefs of true believers (family, friends, and loved ones), the reason as offered in the following article is survival.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/beliefs.html
Offered humbly for your perusal,
CPiolo
The worst vice of the fanatic is his sincerity. -- Oscar Wilde
CPiolo,
That was a very interesting article. Puts a lot into perspective. I thought the suggestions for dealing with resistence to new ideas were very good.
CPiolo,
Thanks so much for sharing this! I have bookmarked the page.
I found this section especially interesting:
First, skeptics must not expect beliefs to change simply as the result of data or assuming that people are stupid because their beliefs don't change. They must avoid becoming critical or demeaning in response to the resilience of beliefs. People are not necessarily idiots just because their beliefs don't yield to new information. Data is always necessary, but it is rarely sufficient.Here is the URL again in clickable format:Second, skeptics must learn to always discuss not just the specific topic addressed by the data, but also the implications that changing the related beliefs will have for the fundamental worldview and belief system of the affected individuals. Unfortunately, addressing belief systems is a much more complicated and daunting task than simply presenting contradictory evidence. Skeptics must discuss the meaning of their data in the face of the brain's need to maintain its belief system in order to maintain a sense of wholeness, consistency, and control in life. Skeptics must become adept at discussing issues of fundamental philosophies and the existential anxiety that is stirred up any time beliefs are challenged. The task is every bit as much philosophical and psychological as it is scientific and data-based.
Third, and perhaps most important, skeptics must always appreciate how hard it is for people to have their beliefs challenged. It is, quite literally, a threat to their brain's sense of survival. It is entirely normal for people to be defensive in such situations. The brain feels it is fighting for its life. It is unfortunate that this can produce behavior that is provocative, hostile, and even vicious, but it is understandable as well.
The lesson for skeptics is to understand that people are generally not intending to be mean, contrary, harsh, or stupid when they are challenged. It's a fight for survival. The only effective way to deal with this type of defensiveness is to de-escalate the fighting rather than inflame it. Becoming sarcastic or demeaning simply gives the other person's defenses a foothold to engage in a tit-for-tat exchange that justifies their feelings of being threatened ("Of course we fight the skeptics-look what uncaring, hostile jerks they are!") rather than a continued focus on the truth.
Skeptics will only win the war for rational beliefs by continuing, even in the face of defensive responses from others, to use behavior that is unfailingly dignified and tactful and that communicates respect and wisdom. For the data to speak loudly, skeptics must always refrain from screaming.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/beliefs.html
Ginny
Yes a very interesting article. However, I can't help but question whether ALL beliefs stem from a basic survival instinct. I have a friend who works in a brainwave research lab, and he is the only one there who believes in psychic phenomena. When questioned about it, he has his reasons but I really question whether he presents his side as a defense at all. I remember one occassion he just started giggling like a little boy and basically said "I'll prove it to them." I really think he believes what he believes in, at no point have I gotten the impression that a doubt is threatening his world view or sense of survival. He knows his stuff too, he's done his research on things along these lines. A while back I went to a physics lecture with him and he was criticizing the speaker (a well respected professor from UC Berekely) for being sloppy and less than scientific in that what he was presenting is kind of unprovable. He really believes in investigating things scientifically and quantifying these phenomena. So it seems to me belief could arise out of a sense of wonder and imagination if nothing else, and in his case you cannot deny that it's tempered with rational intelligence.
But the other question that comes to mind is how does someone move beyond this type of defensive behavior? Sometimes it seems some people is proud to believe in nothing. While that cuts out all the illogical rationalization, it seems to me it can lead to behavior that is so undisciplined so as to be potentially self-destructive, in that other rational beliefs that can really protect you are absent as well.
The article addresses those who are not at all conscious or barely conscious of this behavior, as well as the skeptics who try to appeal to those who hold beliefs as defenses, but what about those who are aware of this tendancy but are still in the habit of thinking or feeling that way? Certainly recognizing that pattern is the first step, but is there anything they can do? I would think some on this board would be in a similar position and they would be interested in the answer.
"It is not so much that you use your mind wrongly--you usually don't use it at all. It uses you. This is the disease." -Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now
((((((((cpiolo)))))))))
Thanks ! Excellent comprehensive article. I'm printing that out! Hope this finds you and yours well.luv,Tina
That is a very interesting article and thread!
I know that the two people who helped me to see the error of my beliefs both were people who always treated me and my beliefs with respect. While I often got heated in my arguments, they never did. In fact, they would stop talking with me if I started to get defensive or 'excited.' Not only did I actually LISTEN to what they had to say, I also was forced to face the fact that my reactions to opposing views was less than polite, or respectful.
--LisaBobeesa
Piolo,
I brought this subject back to the top, because I think the article you provided us is very important. It gave me a new perspective on why people are resistant to new ideas. It also, gave good, practical advice on the ways to get people to be more receptive. His ideas on how to get people to change seems like common sense, but even though we know these ideas to self evident, sometimes we forget all about them in the heat of a verbal interchange.
I just wanted to bring the whole thing over here!
Finally, it should be comforting to all skeptics to remember that the truly amazing part of all of this is not that so few beliefs change or that people can be so irrational, but that anyone's beliefs ever change at all. Skeptics' ability to alter their own beliefs in response to data is a true gift; a unique, powerful, and precious ability. It is genuinely a "higher brain function" in that it goes against some of the most natural and fundamental biological urges. Skeptics must appreciate the power and, truly, the dangerousness that this ability bestows upon them. They have in their possession a skill that can be frightening, life-changing, and capable of inducing pain. In turning this ability on others it should be used carefully and wisely. Challenging beliefs must always be done with care and compassion.I just thought that was neat - we should congratulate ourselves if we can change a belief - particularily if it's one that we feel is based in evidence and logic. We have a "higher brain function."
It is entirely normal for people to be defensive in such situations. The brain feels it is fighting for its life. It is unfortunate that this can produce behavior that is provocative, hostile, and even vicious, but it is understandable as well.Simon's now old request for us now has scientific backing. "Please be Civil."The lesson for skeptics is to understand that people are generally not intending to be mean, contrary, harsh, or stupid when they are challenged. It's a fight for survival. The only effective way to deal with this type of defensiveness is to de-escalate the fighting rather than inflame it. Becoming sarcastic or demeaning simply gives the other person's defenses a foothold to engage in a tit-for-tat exchange that justifies their feelings of being threatened ("Of course we fight the skeptics-look what uncaring, hostile jerks they are!") rather than a continued focus on the truth.
Worth the visit: http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/beliefs.html
waiting
Seems to me that as Witnesses, we learned a lot about how to change people's ideas. Paradoxicaly, we come here and forget everything we have learned. I think this article is a good reminder of something we already know.
Good point Larc. I guess the thing is atleast for some of us, we no longer have this agenda to change people's minds. Of course the scripture about having a mild temper and deep respect also comes to mind, that's not a bad idea just because the witnesses happen to teach it too.
"It is not so much that you use your mind wrongly--you usually don't use it at all. It uses you. This is the disease." -Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now
