belief

[miriam_e]

What does it mean to believe?

It seems to be that you take some statement as accurate -- that it fits the facts. I think this is different from "to believe in something", because that generally involves a suspension of critical thought. Believing in something is generally done regardless of the facts, instead of to align with the facts.

Interesting, the subtleties of a deceptively simple word. At first glance they appear to mean the same thing, but they are more like opposites.

Comments

My favorite belief

[revbob2.livejournal.com]

"I believe I'll have another drink." W. C. Fields, I believe. ;-)

You can come up with a whole collection of "I know" or "I believe" statements, each of them subtly different. I'll stick with "I know" because I've thought about that one longer.

"I know 2 + 2 = 4" == Within a reasonably consistent system, that statement obeys the rules, while "2+2=5" doesn't (and "2+2=chocolate pudding" isn't a well formed statement in the system).

"I know the sun will rise tomorrow." == According to the best system I know of to apply to the real-world entities, the earth and the celestial objects, sunrise is inevitable: it just falls out of the way the system works.

"I know that if I mix vinegar and baking soda, I'll get a fizzy mess, and I'd better stand back a little or I might get woozy." == When I've tried it, it's always done that, and I see no reason why it wouldn't in the future. I have a fair idea why it does that from high school chemistry, but my understanding of high school chemistry isn't anything like as consistent a system as Newtonian mechanics (e.g., *why* doesn't the fizzy mess turn into vinegar and baking soda instead?)

"I know you, don't know what I'm going through, standing here looking at you." == Little Anthony (of L.A. and the Imperials) is asserting that it hurts so bad. He's reporting on the impossibility of someone else perfectly understanding his internal state, which is a matter of epistemological faith for him (or else it's just been his experience in the past, but that isn't nearly as interesting) -- which he then pretty much disproves with the song!

"I know that my redeemer liveth." == Utterly devoid of predictive power. For everyone who assures me that this entails salvation by faith I can find another who says it entails salvation by works or by character, and on and on for every conceivable statement which might follow from it.

Re: My favorite belief

[revbob2.livejournal.com]

More on "I know that my redeemer liveth": the one historical fact about which there is no doubt at all is "he's dead, Jim", so the statement starts off as palpably false! Mind you, that's part of the attractiveness of the statement, that it doesn't fit into mundane, secular reality. Believers use that to assure themselves that the statement is talking about a higher reality.

I wonder what they'd infer about "I know my redeemer is made out of raspberry jello."

Re: My favorite belief

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

It's amazing, isn't it, how much of religious waffle uses deeply meaningless statements. I have a theory that the unresolvable internal conflicts produced in someone trying to come to grips with such statements help to leave them open to conversion.

The classic brainwashing technique, is to give a person a dilemma with no way out, then when all seems lost offer them a single avenue of hope. Fundamentalist preachers use hellfire and brimstone to make you feel that you are doomed for all eternity, then offer the shining beacon of salvation. Torturers brainwash by inflicting pain/shame/sleep-deprivation over and over, often without requesting anything of the captive, then when it is totally unbearable they act friendly saying they want to stop this but can't unless the captive does X. (Although many torturers seem to lose the plot and just do it for the "fun" instead.)

A few meaningless statements that christians use that I can think of off the top of my head:
- Jesus died for our sins. (It sounds like it should mean something, but is oddly nonsensical.)
- god is just and loves us but would happily doom us forever if we question his love and justice.
- we must atone for Adam and Eve's sin. (Another weird one which sounds like it should mean something.)
- the bible is the word of god because it says it is the word of god.

Re: My favorite belief

[revbob2.livejournal.com]

we must atone for Adam and Eve's sin.

Aussies must have missed the McGuffy Reader, a 19th century textbook that assured little Americans, "in Adam's fall we sinnèd all."

Jesus died for our sins. (It sounds like it should mean something, but is oddly nonsensical.)

Well, actually there's quite a bit of theological scholarship on that point, and there are various theories: Jesus took our place and received the judgment that we had coming to us (substitutionary atonement); Jesus paid with his life a ransom to the devil (or just "sin" if you aren't a big fan of Old Scratch), to whom all humankind had been sold by the Fall; Jesus took all our sins onto himself and then washed them away via his death and resurrection, thereby cleansing us; and several more I've forgotten.

But remember, theology has been called "faith in search of understanding." If you start with the premise that Jesus saved us through his death and resurrection, then it's natural to ask how that works. If you start with a different premise it sounds like gobbledegook. The Wikipedia article on atonement is a fair place to start if you're curious, but alas it isn't as nuanced as most of wikipedia's articles on religion. If you want nuance, try the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on atonement, which is so nuanced I'm not entirely convinced it says anything at all.