Is belief really a choice?

[The Grand Nudger]

Original point of contention:

And would add, the fact we do condemn them, shows we believe we do choose what we believe and that there are things that we ought to believe(ie. there are thought crimes).

You're pointing to another belief.....to demonstrate that we choose our beliefs? At what point are you going to realize that this is fruitless...and how might I explain this to you in some other way?

So we believe two things when we condemn people:

Full stop - we believe things - but whether or not we had a choice in that belief is not established by our having a belief.

1) We chose what to believe.
2) That there are things we ought to believe.

1] Did you choose to believe that?

2]Did you choose those things you ought to believe?

Without those 2, we can't condemn 9/11 Hijackers.

Of course we can. Nevertheless, whether or not we can condemn a person - consistently or inconsistently has what to say about whether or not we can choose what we believe?

Of course, I said, this doesn't demonstrate we are right in our assumptions.

I think I've defended the original point of contention well and we are moving away from that now.

You haven't begun to argue the original point of contention Mystic - look at the op - you offered your aside as a way to demonstrate that we had a choice in what we believe. At least I assumed that this was the reason you offered it? Was I mistaken?