(March 5, 2014 at 6:26 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:Choosing the path of belief then. That certainly makes more sense, send is broadly compatible with Pascals Wager.(March 5, 2014 at 6:19 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote: What if you choose to expose yourself to only Christian literature, discuss religion with only Christian people, and avoid trains of thought which head down tracks you don't wish to consider?
In the sense of, I can't choose to have diarrhea, but I can choose to eat half a pound of figs.
In that sense, one probably could.
But is that choosing what to believe, or is it choosing a path that reduces the anxiety of cognitive dissonance?
I thought of the question in these terms: Could I choose to believe as true, something that I currently think is a load of codswallop?
I do not think that I can.
Having enjoyed both an atheist and theist selection of literature I do see in both (although the theists are much worse) a tendency to take the worse, most simplistic and weakest arguments of the other to attack. If one was exposed to only one its easy to see how one could choose to deny oneself evidence to support either position.
"Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken."
Sith code
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken."
Sith code
