Are Beliefs Just Excuses?

[Captain Cardio]

I heard an idea recently:

People don't act (or decide how they want society to function) in any significant way to suit their beliefs. Rather, they subconciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want.

This would mean that beliefs are basically irrelevant, and are just manufactured excuses, or a way to glorify or substantiate one's own way of wanting things.

Is this possible, does this idea hold any substance?

Thoughts?

[Aussie]

Might explain why (generally) certain demographics have certain religions - ie western-christianity, middle east-islam, east - buddhism

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Captain Cardio I heard an idea recently: People don't act (or decide how they want society to function) in any significant to suit their beliefs. Rather, they subconciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want. This would mean that beliefs are basically irrelevant, and are just manufactured excuses, or a way to glorify or substantiate one's own way of wanting things. Is this possible, does this idea hold any substance? Thoughts?

I would say that a lot of people do that who are not born into a particular way of life that trains them to believe. Or they might find a religion that will help them to rebel from the one they grew up in and which they found lacking. The same might be said of becoming an athiest.

It is sort of like going shopping for cloths that express what we think we really are.

[Piscean]

People don't act (or decide how they want society to function) in any significant way to suit their beliefs. Rather, they subconciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want

This statement may apply to many but it's not true of everyone just because you said it.

[JaneDoe321]

I think that for some this is sort of a chicken-or-egg type question.

If you're raised eyebrow deep in X faith system, then you "want the world" to be a specific way, and that's based on the teachings of X religion.

I also think that what religions *claim* to teach and what they actually teach are not always the same, so people who decide to leave their faith system of birth may get sucked into something due to false advertising (if you will), and then there is that fear factor to overcome... like "Wow, this isn't what I thought it would be, but the pit of fire and brimstone sure is scary.... *teetering...*"

Quote by: Captain Cardio People don't act (or decide how they want society to function) in any significant way to suit their beliefs. Rather, they subconciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want. This would mean that beliefs are basically irrelevant, and are just manufactured excuses, or a way to glorify or substantiate one's own way of wanting things. Is this possible, does this idea hold any substance? Thoughts?

I would tend to agree with the statement in that it applies to most people. It seems to me that people believe in things that tend to serve their own self-interests. With few notable exceptions, the wealthy who benefit from the market economy believe in the "market" and capitalism. Folks in the wealthy's factories support unions and social programs which provide services that, unlike the wealthy, they cannot afford to buy on the open market. These are general statements and no doubt there would be many individual exceptions.

I would also add that early childhood indoctrination is a powerful determinant of beliefs. For example, most religious people adhere to the religion in which they were raised. There are few, but some, converts. It is irrational to believe that the religion into which you just happen to be born just happens to be the right one--and all the others are in error. If you thought your religion wasn't the right one, the correct one, why would you stay in it? The early childhood indoctrination also plays a major part in what people believe about other races, economic classes, political affiliation, etc.

At any rate, your basic assertion suggests that a--if not "the"--major determinant of beliefs, and probably ethics and values, is self-interest and not careful consideration.

[grandpa]

Quote by: sdbest I would tend to agree with the statement in that it applies to most people. It seems to me that people believe in things that tend to serve their own self-interests.

I would say they reflect our perceived self-interests.

Grandpa h.

Quote by: grandpa I would say they reflect our perceived self-interests. Grandpa h.

Excellent clarification.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Captain Cardio Are Beliefs Just Excuses ? I heard an idea recently: People don't act (or decide how they want society to function) in any significant way to suit their beliefs. Rather, they subconciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want. This would mean that beliefs are basically irrelevant, and are just manufactured excuses, or a way to glorify or substantiate one's own way of wanting things. Is this possible, does this idea hold any substance? Thoughts?

I do not think that people "subconsciously decide how they want to act (or society to be), and then find beliefs that suit what they want", unless those people indicate a lack of their ego.

[Captain Cardio]

What if we were to pose this question about non-religious people's beliefs?

----- Example A

Say you can believe or not believe free will exists.

Person 1 might have had more successes than failures in his life, so he likes to think he is fully responsible for those successes. He would be more likely to believe free will exists, because it suits his ego.

Person 2 might have had more failures than successes in his life, so he doesn't like to think he is responsible for his life. He is more likely to believe free will doesn't exist, because it suits his ego.

In either of these cases, it is not any actual evidence that persuades individuals to believe one way or another, it is whatever makes them feel better.

----- Example B

Another example could be whether you believe pro-life or pro-choice is more appropriate for society.

Person 1 might hate the idea of ever having a child, and is uncomfortable with the idea of not having an abortion available if he gets someone pregnant.

Person 2 thinks that even though children can be a lot of work, they are little miracles and always worth the effort. Because he sees children differently, he is disturbed by the idea of abortion.

In either of these cases, it is the individual's feelings about how they would react in their own life about the issue, that makes them decide which side of the fence they are on.

-----

Both free will and abortion (among other issues) are issues where many people seem to have irreconcilable differences of opinion. Despite the depth that debate goes into on many occasions, many people don't change their mind on issues.


In strikes me that maybe in order to get past these differences, people require a greater commitment to truth, than to their own happiness.

Given we are only mammals though, and our brains are wired to try to achieve states of happiness (or satisfaction), how do we ever really know if our opinions, and the opinions of those who agree with us, are ever truly reflective of reality, and not just on aspects of an individual's personality?

And to add another question, how does society make individuals that would be more committed to truth than their own happiness?


I acknowledge the phrasing in this post may have been sloppy, but I'm outa time. I'd appreciate it if people would try to sympathetically try to discuss what I'm getting at, rather than nit-picking corrections about mistakes I'm sure I've made in places in this post .

Also let's try not to get sidetracked onto free will or abortion debates please.