belief

[miriam_e]

Recently I was visited by two nice, but deluded people who wanted to convert me to their favorite mythology. When I explained to them that I don't believe anything they were incredulous. "But everybody believes in something. You must believe in something."

I was puzzled -- still am. Why do people feel they need to believe something? It's something I never understood. Why this desire to believe unlikely or impossible things? The universe doesn't change itself and its history to suit mistaken human whims or desires.

Religious beliefs are some of the weirdest examples of this. Wanting there to be a god does not make it true (especially considering all the evidence against the existence of such a being).

But the desire to believe is the part I find hardest to explain. Why would anybody want to corrupt their understanding? Most religious people appear to have so damaged their critical faculties that they don't even realise their view of the world is broken, even though it takes very little effort to get them to admit that they want a god to exist. Occasionally you can even hear them utter that most idiotic of statements, that they wouldn't want to live in a world where their god didn't exist. Don't they realise how incredibly stupid that is? No. I guess they don't... but I wonder why they don't. Bear in mind that these are often people who are otherwise quite intelligent and rational. For some reason their ability to think clearly just dissolves when matters of belief become involved. Why is that?

Somehow the religious meme so damages thinking, that wanting something to be true becomes indistinguishable from being true. There are many ways this presents, and a lot of them are at the root of mankind's greatest evils. I've already mentioned the multitude of conflicting beliefs in gods, but they are not the only ones. There are beliefs that one race of people is superior to another (whatever "superior" means). There is the belief that some political system is "superior". There is the belief that people should conform in dress, speech, sexuality, aspirations, and so on. Some believe stars and planets guide their and others' actions, that telepathy exists, that aliens are among us, that we are reborn after we die, that homeopathy works, that they can judge a person's nature based on a superficial meeting. All around the world people are utterly convinced that their particular prejudice is correct, without, or even in spite of, evidence. People are incredibly quick to believe absurd things. Why, when it is so often shown to be wrong, and when they are so often the victims of others' prejudices? Why are they still so eager to believe?

Wanting to impose any belief upon reality is dangerous, even when the belief appears to coincidentally fit. The real world is always changing, but a person's beliefs tend to be static (the most powerful and influential might dress this way today, but not tomorrow). Also, getting the right answer for the wrong reasons is still wrong (spitting is a bad idea, not because it is rude, but because it is a way to spread tuberculosis).

Wherever it touches on our lives belief seems to damage us. So why are people so enthusiastic about embracing it. Why do they feel it is necessary? I manage fine without it. What the heck is going on?

When I was a kid I had a blackboard on my bedroom wall. One of the first things I wrote on it was "What is belief?" It remained there, bugging me in the corner of my blackboard til I left home. Now it is more than forty years down the track and I feel like I'm still no closer to answering that question.

What is most scary though, is that in spite of the extensive social damage it causes, most people don't even realise there is a question there to be asked.

Comments

[greylock.livejournal.com]

But the desire to believe is the part I find hardest to explain.

You don't understand it?
I'm not sure I can adequately explain it, but I understand it well enough.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I really don't. I am at an utter loss to comprehend it. Why would a person want to break their thinking? Why would someone believe something simply because they like it? Whether something is real or not has nothing to do with it being a nice fantasy or a horrible one (and that's another can of worms: believing paranoid delusions must feel terrible).

How does someone get rid of the simple fact that believing does not make something true? Why on Earth would they want to?

[greylock.livejournal.com]

I really don't. I am at an utter loss to comprehend it. Why would a person want to break their thinking?

Comfort. You can explain away the unknown and unknowable, and suddenly the world is a lot smaller, and less scary.

We all do it. I mean, you and I understand that if/when they discover Higgs-Bosun we're just going to take it on faith (peer-reviewed faith, but faith nonetheless) that it exists. In theory, we could repeat the experiment to verify it for ourselves but we probably won't.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

you and I understand that if/when they discover Higgs-Bosun we're just going to take it on faith

But that's just it. I don't take anything on faith. I read tons of scientific literature and I take everything with a grain of salt. I question everything. Truly. I believe nothing. If I find that I'd accepted something was probably real and then it later turns out that it wasn't, I have absolutely no difficulty adapting to the new evidence. I believe neither the old evidence, nor the old evidence. It all simply gets weighed up as degrees of likelihood, with nothing absolutely certain.

I don't understand how it could possibly be comforting to guarantee that you'll be wrong. Any child knows that wanting something to be so doesn't make it true. How can anybody possibly take comfort in choosing to be wrong?

I'm not doubting that you have hit upon the rationalisation. I just don't understand how people can feel that walking into the oncoming traffic with their eyes closed is more comforting than avoiding the traffic by keeping their eyes open. It strikes me as very, very weird.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

People don't take comfort in choosing to be wrong. They don't see it that way. And if they thought they were walking into oncoming traffic they wouldn't.

It would strike you as weird if you characterize it that way, if you believe that it is that way.

Belief can be undone at any moment. One can simply choose, "you know, I don't believe that anymore" and they just stop. That being the case, trying on a belief won't necessarily feel that threatening.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

But belief is something that the majority of people(I think) cling to. People define themselves by their beliefs ("I'm a christian/democrat/naturopath/white-supremecist"). These are not things people give up easily. That's why I find it so strange. These things are not only wrong, but also things that people defend ferociously. Even weirder, people take offense if others denounce their belief. It is odd because clinging to something so obviously wrong is so very counterproductive. All of those things are way too easy to show are wrong. And even the things that I can't show are wrong, it is still easy to show that the belief is wrong because there is insufficient reason for the conclusions. So why put themselves so at risk?

I agree with you that people don't see it as choosing to be wrong. What puzzles me is why they don't see it as what it really is. Why can they see it as comforting to wander into the traffic with their eyes closed?

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Thing is they *aren't* wandering into traffic with their eyes closed.
People who wander into traffic with their eyes closed are the only people who wander into traffic with their eyes closed.

They are either believing what they haven't questioned or paradigms that give them comfort, they aren't worried they are going to break their thinking. People *know* many beliefs can not be proven. Maybe belief is just acting as if something is true.
Imagine the difference if you assume your are loved or if you assume you are not.
Just assuming something is true can make a huge difference in the quality of someones life and interactions.
When people tire of beliefs they often throw them away, sometimes coming up with the next working theory that appeals to them.

The funny thing for me here is that I've heard similar sounding arguments for belief. Catastrophic damage is promised if someone chooses not to believe.
Fear tactics can't be underestimated. Most people are indoctrinated from a very early age.

Also many people have what can be termed as spiritual experiences and given that they may put the labels on it that are available to them, usually religious ones.
How does one explain or express the unexplainable?

[damien-wise.livejournal.com]

I think that's it, to a great extent.

I once heard a friend who had in the past professed to hold "new age" beliefs, talking about people who follow mainstream religions. She said she envied them. To her, being a "new age" believer meant to cobble-together some thoughts and philosophies without the benefit of formal instruction, leadership or a recognised power-structure. "It must give them great comfort," she said.

I think many people, deep down, feel a need for a higher power, and belief that everything happens for a reason. For example: the rainbow was a message from god to appreciate the beauty of nature, which he created; the car-crash was a test from god, but once you get through the rehab, it'll reinforce in you the need for compassion; the shop-lifter was led-astray by evil thoughts that come from not listening to god; the rape was all part of god's great plan, and although you can't see any good from it or imagine how a loving and all-powerful god could let such evil happen to one of his chosen, you've just gotta have faith and not question him or his plan; winning $15 on the poker-machine was a little present from god; the new baby niece was a gift from god, and so on.
Other people would be capable of seeing those events as cause-and-effect, conscious decisions, a lapse of judgement/self-control, the product of mental illness, or even random chance.

With enough faith, one can push-aside a mountain of rationality, ignore any amount of scientific evidence, and absolve oneself or others of any amount of personal responsibility.

Those people earnestly need an explanation for everything, even if the explanation is an imprecise catch-all they (by definition or circular argument) can't understand. It's nice to think you're not the only one; that there's someone looking over you like your parents did when you were a little kid; that even if life seems awful now, there's always the afterlife to look forward to as a reward to putting-up and toiling-on; and that is untrue to say: Shit Happens.
You can get a lot of comfort, security and affirmation from that.
Wrap it up with ceremonies, traditions, art an music, social/semi-political figures, a moral framework, and a rationale to fight/exclude those who are feared because they are different, and you've got a tool with which to run a large society for generations with relative stability.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

When people believe it's not because they want to break their thinking. They don't want to break their thinking.
Perhaps peoples experiences cause them to feel the likelihood of something and it's not something they can test. It can be much easier to just take things as a working theory. Or perhaps people believe that believing things might make them true in some sense.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

If they saw them as a "working theory" I would have no problem with that. But they don't. The offense generated when beliefs are questioned and the desperation with which they cling to those beliefs indicate that they are much more.

perhaps people believe that believing things might make them true in some sense

Yes. I have met a number of people who definitely do this. That takes the whole belief problem to its ultimate absurd conclusion. Such magical thinking is far too easy to disprove. Why does it persist? I have no idea. Perhaps it isn't persisting. It may be dying out. I hope so. Once upon a time, if past histories are anything to go by, this kind of thinking was common. What puzzles me is why it exists at all when it is so easy to disprove.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

"If they saw them as a "working theory" I would have no problem with that. But they don't. "

How can you know that they don't?
If they tire of it, it's over pretty quickly.
They might not put it that way of course. Belief takes defending, that's probably why it sounds that way.

"perhaps people believe that believing things might make them true in some sense"
Yes. I have met a number of people who definitely do this. That takes the whole belief problem to its ultimate absurd conclusion. Such magical thinking is far too easy to disprove. Why does it persist? I have no idea. Perhaps it isn't persisting. It may be dying out. I hope so. Once upon a time, if past histories are anything to go by, this kind of thinking was common. What puzzles me is why it exists at all when it is so easy to disprove."

Hmm. Placebo effect also the nocebo effect. It's real, provable. Seems to me that has something to do with belief.

Once someone has had a personal experience of the numinous kind it is not so easy to disprove.
It seems to me there are things you believe simply do not exist.

We all have our biases.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

"The offense generated when beliefs are questioned and the desperation with which they cling to those beliefs indicate that they are much more."

You know it really depends on who one is questioning, and how about what.
Many people are comfortable with friendly discussions. Some people feel they need to defend what may be for them their whole paradigm. Maybe they fear the loss of their world view cause they've no idea what would replace it and the unknown is scary to them.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Maybe they fear the loss of their world view cause they've no idea what would replace it and the unknown is scary to them.

Yes!! I think you may have hit on it!

Perhaps I've been looking at this from the wrong angle. It may be that comfort in having some kind of explanation for things is only the lesser part, and fear of uncertainty is the greater. This didn't really occur to me... probably because I enjoy uncertainty instead of fearing it. People would be quick to say their belief is attractive, but less happy about admitting the fear of uncertainty because in a strange way even the admission itself almost undercuts the belief.

Very interesting. This may also be the key to fixing it. Viewed the right way uncertainty is freeing and exhilarating. I feel like it lets me forever ride on the crest of a wave of information. Nothing is ever the same or boring. The scenery is always shifting and I'm always surrounded by beautiful, intricate puzzles. Uncertainty flashes and scintillates, while certainty is dim, unlit, lifeless, and about giving up.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Well I do think that's one reason, and I think it's more likely to apply to big belief systems rather than a single belief.
It's not fair to assume that everyone with beliefs you don't agree with are just certainty freaks.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Well, I didn't say that "everyone whose beliefs [I] don't agree with are just certainty freaks". :) heheheh

I don't actually think that. The crucial thing is not whether I agree with them or not; it is whether they are beliefs or not. I tend to think that beliefs themselves are the problem.

I'm unsure whether certainty is more important for "big" beliefs or for all beliefs. I hadn't really considered it before you mentioned it. Maybe comfort or tribalism or offloading thought are the larger component. I don't know. I have a lot of food for thought here. It is going to take me some time to digest it all properly.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Well I guess you didn't say that. :)

Off loading thought? What's that mean?

I didn't mean big beliefs, I mean belief systems, them large complicated things that are whole structures made out of multiple beliefs.
The JW's, they got a whole system going.

A single belief like "I am loved. " can be pretty big in effect.

Do you actually have a working definition for belief?
Honestly I'm not sure it's really so different than "tend to think".

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Tired, so not thinking clearly. Long (but extremely enjoyable) day at the charity shop and I'm hitting the sack shortly. Excuse me if this post wanders all over, incoherently. :)

Off-loading: Someone here mentioned that one motivation for relying on belief could be the convenience of letting someone else do the thinking for them -- offloading the responsibility for thinking onto someone else. I think it was kremmen thought of it.

I did some couch-potatoing tonight and instead of doing useful stuff I read some very interesting, if rather harrowing, stories of people who questioned their beliefs and ended up becoming non-religious. They were harrowing because of the terrible treatment some of them got from "good" christians. Holy cow! Not really restful. I should choose my relaxation activities more carefully. :)

I also sent a comment cautioning some incredibly angry people that the chain-letter they'd posted on their blog which voiced racist fears about muslims was part of the problem, not part of the solution. The fury they vented at me totally surprised me. It turned out that they were "good" christians too. That explained it.

Defining "belief" is tricky. It is commonly used in two quite different ways.

• One is the wholehearted belief -- in for a penny, in for a pound. It is something that you identify yourself by; something that is difficult to give up or even change.
  
  
• The other is a casual thing "I believe the bus may be running late today. Oh. Nope, I was wrong. Here it is."

Unfortunately I can't come up with a different word for each. They seem to me quite different things. I'm not sure if they are ends of a continuum or whether they are different in essence too. I'll have to consider this when I'm more rested tomorrow... though I have to go out again tomorrow. Damn. I hate driving anywhere. It is always so exhausting.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

I'm tired too. :)

Mmkay, I understand the offloading.

"I read some very interesting, if rather harrowing, stories ..."
I'm not surprised but it's definitely not always like that. In fact it's often not like that. But yah that happens sometimes.

"The fury they vented at me totally surprised me. It turned out that they were "good" christians too. That explained it."

Explain it? Does it? I hope not.

I'm most interested in what you think belief is and less how the word is used.
In the examples you mention it sounds like a matter of degree in commitment to a thought.

Would it be fair to say that you believe that belief is bad/negative?

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Honestly you're pretty unusual in that you would question and not understand the nature of belief so early and for so long.
I think perhaps it's easier to understand if not explain if one spends some time sitting right inside it.
I was raised with a particularly cumbersome belief system. At first I believed cause my mother told me it was true and I was very very young. Also there was a "miracle" early on that reinforced that. I took it all as true until unproven I guess for a long time. It was more important to me that it be workable than absolutely true. Turns out it wasn't workable.

I still do a lot of wondering about what is true, and what is not. My mind has seemed always to be interested in metaphysical subjects so I've been playing with these concepts for years. Some beliefs are more workable than others. Of course that doesn't make them true.

Have you thought much about the potential positive affects of belief? I know there are plenty negative ones but it does cut both ways.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I don't think I'm particularly unusual. I've always approached questions from the standpoint that I'm an ordinary person and that I can theoretically do anything anybody else can. I know it isn't strictly true (I have sub-optimal numerical skills and my concentration on some things is easily distracted, while I have above average word skills and can come up with lateral solutions more easily than most), but it is a good and usable starting point. It also handily works against prejudice because it avoids special case arguments.

I can only think of one benefit of belief: tribalism. While it was once a significant payoff for belief, its usefulness in todays shrunken world is highly doubtful.

Are there others I have missed?

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

:) Well I think you're unusual. Only my opinion, of course based on my experiences.

Well your right about tribalism, and that's all about identity.

If we're just talking about belief and the potential benefit of it the best way is to take it down to the smallest and least complex ones and examine how a person would act and see their world under their influence.

Take these questions: Am I loved? Am I capable? Is this person out to get me? Does this person care about me?
There are millions of beliefs, millions of working theories that people, without necessarily questioning act on. And some of these have positive effects. Many do not.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

What you said about seeing belief from inside interests me. I guess you might have hit on the reason I find this all so puzzling. I've always been very interested in perceptual and cognitive illusions and the fallibility of our intuition. From the earliest age I read science fiction and other stories about how jumping to conclusions is an easy way to make mistakes. My family is not anti-religious, though we are all non-religious. My parents have a deep reverence for all life and for nature generally, but as I learned more about how belief systems mislead people I became quite strongly anti-religious while enjoying the friendship of a number of religious people among my other atheist and agnostic friends. I like to say I detest the religion, not the people.

Perhaps my 50-something years spent without need of belief has made it hard to understand what people feel when they hide away inside it, there must nevertheless be some reason why they do it -- some incentive that makes sense on some level. If it is comfort at living inside a familiar fable, then I wonder if there is some way to get past that so that muslims, hindus, and christians don't kill each other, and racists don't oppress each other, and snobs don't tread on others. Can the comfortable illusion be cracked?

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

I wondered about your upbringing. I guessed it might be something like that.

" I like to say I detest the religion, not the people."

:) Ever heard the phrase, "Love the sinner, hate the sin." ?

There are multiple reasons why people believe. Sometimes it's fear, sometimes it's comfort, sometimes it's experiences that tell them something they can't ignore, sometimes it's just accepting what's taught and what one is familiar with until something better comes along.

I don't actually think illusions must be cracked by outside forces. Illusions *will* be cracked because they are illusions.

Frankly I think it's easier to argue for kindness than try and tear down whole paradigms. Potentially far more effective as well. Beliefs, world views, assumptions, all these things can evolve and do.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

"Love the sinner, hate the sin."

Yes, I always loved that one. I have a few religious friends who take it to heart, but I've met far too many religious people who don't... and atheists too.

it's easier to argue for kindness than try and tear down whole paradigms

I like the idea of arguing for kindness, I just hope we have the time.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Mmm, I've always hated that one cause I feel it's generally used as a way to cover and perhaps excuse a persons judgment.

Whatever happens kindness is not wasted.

[kremmen.livejournal.com]

The flowchart shows one big advantage to religion. Simplicity. It's much less stressful for some people to let someone else do their thinking for them.

Added to that, wherever you look in the world, it is generally the uneducated, poor, unsuccessful people who are religious. They are the easily convinced ... and they want to be convinced that there is something more than their miserable lives.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the pointer to http://www.freethoughtpedia.com -- a cool site. I hope it grows. Unfortunately they automatically detect links from outside and foolishly substitute a stupid statement that the image has been linked to without permission. How dopey is that! It took me a while to search on the site for the image... especially since the uploader had misspelled "versus" as "verses". Oops. Anyway I found it eventually. Interesting graph, though I think perhaps a little oversimplified. There is actually a lot of thinking that goes on in theology. Their problem seems to be that they never question their original assumptions. That's also a problem with some scientists of course -- an unwillingness to question assumptions.

The idea of letting someone else do your thinking for you is clearly attractive to a lot of people. You may be right that this is a large part of the motivation. It doesn't explain how threatened and insulted they feel if you question their worldview though. I think dorjejaguar hit on the answer to this one above: it could be that they are scared of uncertainty instead of seeing it as healthy and invigorating. The role in society of certainty is a weird one, and probably deserves a whole other post.

The correlation between poverty and religion has always been an interesting one. Maybe the "opiate of the masses" theory is right and those who have no hope take refuge in religion, but I am rather unconvinced of it. It always seemed a little too elitist to sit comfortably with me. I wonder if it might actually work the other way around. Perhaps it is just that those who didn't learn critical thinking habits simply got stuck with religion because they truly don't see another way. This idea is a little more hopeful to me because it offers a way out of religion: help people to think critically.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

" I think dorjejaguar hit on the answer to this one above: it could be that they are scared of uncertainty instead of seeing it as healthy and invigorating."

I do think that could be a reason in some cases, but I think often the strong reactions are really someone defending their perceived identity. Wanting certainty can certainly be a part of that defense of perceived identity but I think the knee jerk reactions are more directly related to people feeling like they have to defend their identity.
Who are we if we aren't our thoughts, our beliefs, our affiliations, our habits, our tendencies, our looks, our things, our abilities, our ideas about ourselves. Who are we, what are we? What's left?

Or they just think anyone who challenges their beliefs are "Wrong" and need to be fought. This is a belief too. They could just be acting as if that simple thought is true.

~~~
Opiate of the masses? LOL. Opium is far more pleasant.

"It always seemed a little too elitist to sit comfortably with me."
Me too. Doesn't sit comfortable.

Poverty tends to equal less opportunity, less opportunity can mean less exposure to the world and all of it's cultures. Exposure means more opportunity to question what one comes from.

Also the tribal aspect of religious groups means that material support is often available by associating. Whether or not one believes in it, it can pay to not offend when one is in need.

I know a friend who is not a Mormon but she was once associated with the Mormons. They still think she's a Mormon and she isn't gonna disabuse them of the concept because if one is in need, one can just call up the Mormons and they'll send some right over to help *if they believe you're a Mormon*.
Handy.
Now if they believe you were a Mormon and you no longer are, they might excommunicate you.
Not so handy. Unless one prefers it that way.

[sharpblonde.livejournal.com]

"Somehow the religious meme so damages thinking, that wanting something to be true becomes indistinguishable from being true." This is true of other things too... Especially, from my conversations with people and my own experience, about sexuality which is something that I still think is more fluid than most people credit or have the ability to accept within themselves. I think one big advantage I have over many people, though, is that I always try to be honest with myself, even if I sometimes don't know how I feel about something or a belief has become so ingrained that it takes a lot of self searching and maybe a jarring incident or two to dislodge it.

On to religious belief, though. You seem like the epitome of an agnostic to me. I really don't know how else to put it and correct me if I'm wrong, but even though you are almost denouncing religion here, it seems like you have such a strong belief in empirical evidence that if there really is a god out there one day you could believe if given proof. It seems to me you almost take the same kind of comfort in empirical evidence that some people take in religion. It's the thing you cling to. Something bigger out there is what other people cling to. It lets them accept things in their daily lives enough to keep moving forward and, should circumstances change, to accept that. Of course, that's the ideal of what religion does. It doesn't do that for people who cling blindly to every word of a religious text without thinking for themselves or people who follow out of fear.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

It lets them accept things in their daily lives enough to keep moving forward and, should circumstances change, to accept that

A really good point. Someone else mentioned something like that earlier, but I missed it. You said it in a way that caught my attention. That may well be a primary use of religion: paradoxically giving them a kind of static viewpoint that lets them deal with change without overtly adapting to it. Very interesting. I would never have thought of this on my own. Thank you.

Agnostic? heheheh :) Yes. I call myself an atheist, but I'm really an agnostic. Unfortunately, people generally interpret "agnostic" as referring to someone who thinks the question is completely open, with 50:50 likelihood. However a universal creator is so incredibly unlikely that I've left only the tiniest window open for it, so "atheist", while technically wrong, fits better than people's perception of "agnostic". Anyway, it didn't stop me writing a story exploring how there actually could be a creator. :) It is implied in my short story Grace (http://miriam-english.org/stories/grace2.html). If I had proof of a god you're right I would accept it, but it'd need to be pretty damn stringent. None of this vision-that-could-be-hallucination stuff. :)

This post began by talking about belief and how it damages thinking. I keep coming back to religion as the most obvious example, but as you point out it shows itself in sexuality too, and in many other places. Politics, race, clothing, subtle aspects of language, climate change, social class, even some aspects of science... all these are plagued by belief. If we could somehow disarm belief imagine how much better a place the world would be!

[sharpblonde.livejournal.com]

I admit that what was said in previous comments kind of cemented what my brain was having trouble expressing after reading this post and even then it took awhile to get the wording down.

I thought I'd remembered you saying you were atheist before, but that just didn't jive with what you were saying in this post. People like anything in between to be 50:50. People think this of bisexuality too, but most bisexual people I know actually lean pretty strongly one way or the other. I think it's because people don't like NOT KNOWING. If they can't quantify it, it disturbs them. I keep coming back to sexuality because I just recently realized that that has changed in me or not been acknowledged. I just moved a lot closer to the homo side of the kinsey scale and I was closer to that side than the middle before, so yeah, just not as interested in men although if one came along who I was actually romantically attracted to rather than just liked I don't think I've closed myself off enough that I wouldn't notice. *shrug* It all has to do with belief, as you say. I didn't even realize how much I subconsciously bought into the idea of the nuclear family, man included. Consciously, I knew better but it still affected my emotions because, I think, I was never convinced a lesbian nuclear family would work with my ex (she seemed like she didn't want kids and wouldn't admit it... like, just save us the pain and tell me?). I really think my desire for family was confusing my sexuality because of this.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Interesting. Sexuality is hard to quantify and people have such a hard time with it. I keep remembering an illustration I saw in Scientific American years ago that showed the range of physical sexual types in humans. It was great to see that physical attributes are a spectrum, not simply two poles. I should find that picture again so I can show it to people who are obstinately opposed to sexuality being a nebulous thing, because if physical sexuality is impossible to definitively pin down, how much more indeterminate must be the brain's sexuality?

I've been trying to think of ways that I can empathise with people who fear uncertainty. The closest I've come is when someone teases with a cryptic announcement and I try to pull the facts from them. If they persist in being vague I become frustrated and whine, "For heaven's sake, just tell me!"

Or maybe when I'm feeling a little insecure after waking from a nightmare and have to go outside to the toilet -- the dark unknown surrounding me can feel daunting.

However it is a still a lot different from thinking lesbians should be burned at the stake (what a particularly stupid christian politican said a few years back).

Maybe I just can't empathise with inflexible believers and should just be satisfied with it being a puzzle to be fixed.

[cranky--crocus.livejournal.com]

I go to church every week when it's offered. I don't believe in God, or personified Earth, or Faeries*, or...well, anything, really, but the firing of human synapses and these ridiculous (or sane, but regardless seemingly subjective) thoughts/feelings/whatever that are produced. I spend much of my time with my fellow crazy Unitarian Universalists discussing just what beliefs are. Some of my friends in Coming of Age - a program designed to help our youth figure out our heritage and figure out what we belief, if anything - wrote credos about their beliefs or disbeliefs in God, the Red Sox (oh baseball) and the Government. I wrote about my confusion over belief.

Your post sums up a lot of my thoughts. Thank you for posting it!

* - I sometimes write as if I believe in any number of things, but it's generally just the creative writing juices floating around my head and wishing to escape. I tend to just have fun with it. I know, for instance, that my 'Lady Luck', 'Misstress Fate', 'Deputy Destiny' and 'Senora Serendipity' do not exist. I just love women with power, you know (;.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Thank you. :)

Recently I read a wonderful piece by a guy who used to be religious, who, when he started to analyse his beliefs carefully, came to the conclusion that they were irrational. I was delighted to see that, when his entire religious framework disintegrated, he actually became very happy and optimistic about his world, ending his piece by saying that he now sees life as even more precious than before and that he has resolved to live his short, single lifespan as well and as fully as he can. This is exactly how I feel. If we have just one shot at it we should do the absolute best we can for ourselves and those around us. The only thing that lives on is life, so we should enhance that as best we can.