I was talking with a friend recently about thinking and doubt. My friend told me that he has been questioning ideas and beliefs that he's held for a very long time.
Personally, I agree with Socrates, who insisted that the "unexamined life is not worth living." And lest anyone think he didn't really mean that, Socrates uttered those words while explaining why he couldn't abandon his practice of questioning prominent Athenian citizens as an alternative to execution.
I, of course, am not as courageous as Socrates. But I agree that examining one's beliefs is, on the whole, a good thing. A scary and dangerous thing. But in the end, a good thing.
So I commended my friend.
He then added that, because he no longer feels as certain as he once did about traditional theological teachings, many people in his church fear that he has gone off the deep end. In response, and off the top of my head - while pumping gas no less - I replied:
"No one goes off the deep end by not believing something."
The more I think about that statement, the more convinced I am that it is true. The deep end and beyond is for believers, not skeptics. Unbelievers may be many things, but they rarely become nut jobs. Believers, on the other hand, frequently do somersaults with a twist off the ten-meter board and plunge into deep waters. Some of them never come up for air.
Even more interesting is the fact that in American politics, "people of faith" tend to be associated with what we call "conservativism," whereas secular people tend to be "liberals." The reason this is interesting is that skepticism is the conservative epistemological posture. Belief is the wild-eyed liberal practice.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not criticising people for believing things - I believe many things myself. I just think we ought to acknowledge that belief, not doubt, is the path to crazytown, and the less skepticism we bring to the practice of forming our beliefs, the more likely we are to arrive at that destination.
Happy New Year
Joe H.
Posts
The Years Of Writing Dangerously
9 years ago
4 comments:
I think you should clarify your argument. YOU don't "believe" torture is wrong under our constitution? YOU don't "believe" that Palin and others have misrepresented the key issues in the current health care debate? Your previous posts, including your stated anger and maybe hatred for Bush, etc. seem to confirm your strong belief about this. As far as religious beliefs, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. did not have any religious belief or faith yet were extremely dangerous and evil people. On the other hand, Ghandi, Mandela, Mother Theresa all believed deeply; they were not free from doubt, but they believed certain things so strongly that they were willing to suffer and die for those beliefs, and because they believed so strongly they made our world a little bit better.
Anonymous,
What are you talking about?
Perhaps you mean "Don't you" when you write "you don't." That would make sense, so I'll assume that's where you are going.
First, I do believe things - I said so in my post. So I don't object to people believing things. It is impossible not to believe things. My point is about caution, not utter skepticism.
Second, I never liked President Bush. But even after eight years of his utter incompetance all all the damage his predency created, I don't hate the man. Correct me if I'm wrong, I've never said a single thing from which a fair inference that I hate President Bush can be drawn. He is a war criminal who did great damage to this country. He should be prosecuted for things that he has admitted doing - things that were illegal and things about which he lied repeatedly prior to their becoming public knowledge.
But that doesn't mean that I hate the man.
Third, my argument is not aimed at religeous belief per se. It is aimed at fundamentalist belief. It criticizes believing without giving serious thought to a topic, or believing without excersizing reasonable degrees of skepticism. It criticizes believing without, or inspite of, actual evidence.
My point is that people don't RISK going off the deep end by not believing something the way they do when they believe. Believing is a more dangerous activity than not believing. It should be done with caution.
That's all I'm saying.
Joe
Funny post for a serious topic.
I've never thought of it quite that way but, yeah, skepticism does seem to promote mental health.
Have you read David Neiwert's stuff on fundamentalism? In short, he says that any political belief that focuses on "one true way" is trouble. Ideologies of all stripes can be ridiculously whacky, according to Neiwert, but as long as they are skeptical enough to think that someone else might be equally right, they tend to be non-violent. When a political group believes that they, and only they, have access to the truth, violence is not far behind.
Matt 10:16 "Be as shrewd as snakes, and as innocent as doves." Of course we should question things; people in authority, pastors, teachers and parents. Skepticism IS SANITY.
A Hurd
Post a Comment