(April 6, 2018 at 4:29 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(April 6, 2018 at 2:19 pm)Bahana Wrote: What's interesting to me about all the different sects of Christianity is that it is a prime example of humans using their own reason to create a belief system. Look at how varied some denominations are. Some will allow a homosexual to lead a church while others will not let a known gay person through the door. They all use the same Bible but use their own reason to decide what parts to emphasize and how to properly interpret scripture. It's not like some supernatural being is communicating them to tell them exactly what to do. If some Christians here believe that is the case then feel free to provide evidence of your communication with this being.
That sounds silly to me too! We all have different backgrounds, different biases, and different understandings about a number of things. I wouldn't expect Christianity to be any different. I don't think that any of us, are above reproach; I've been wrong on things before, I changed my mind on things, and I've had to eat crow on occasion. I'm still growing, still learning, and I'm sure still screwing up.
I do disagree, however, that any of this means that people are just making things up (perhaps some are). But some of us, don't believe that we are free to just make things up, or that thins are subjective. Some believe that there is an objective truth, that we are trying to achieve.
Quote:The core insight Burton makes in On Being Certain is this: Certainty is a feeling. There is a feeling we have when we know something. To experience this feeling for yourself Burton asks us to recall a recent tip of the tongue experience. Think of meeting someone knowing you know her name but being unable to recall it. That feeling of knowing--"I know this!"--combined with a lack of content (being unable to recall the name) nicely separates the content of knowledge (the name) from the feeling of knowing (the feeling inherent in the tip of the tongue experience). In short, there is a felt experience that is associated with knowing something. Or, more specifically, knowing you know something.
Burton, a neurologist, speculates that this "feeling of knowing" or the "feeling of conviction" is vital to human cognition as it provides us with a reward structure for thought. After successfully solving a problem the feeling of knowing helps signal to us that a solution has arrived. The feeling of knowing also helps us engage in mental search. If I feel I know something (like your name) I'll persist in digging into my memory to figure it out. If, however, I don't get the feeling of knowing I'll not waste any time searching for your name. A similar thing occurs when my students take tests. Sometimes they reach a question where they have a strong feeling of knowing: "I know this!" But on other questions they just draw a blank. No feeling of knowing. On those questions they just guess and move on. But it they feel that they know the answer they will linger and engage in mental search.
Beyond illuminating the phenomenological experience of conviction/knowledge, Burton's other big point is that this system is very glitchy and error prone. Specifically, once I get the feeling of knowing I may forgo any further investigation or reflection. My feeling of knowing tells me I have the answer so why sweat looking for alternatives? As a reinforcing emotion knowledge feels good, it's pleasurable. Consequently, may people stick with the pleasure of "knowing" instead of shrugging off the feeling to reenter the world of debate and argument. It takes a kind of courage to move back into uncertainty. More specifically, it takes a kind of self-overcoming, of saying "No" to yourself. "Knowing" is as pleasurable as doughnuts or ice cream and, like with other pleasures of the flesh, self-restraint and discipline may be required to move back into uncertainty. People might need a diet from certainty. How's that for a New Year's Resolution? To not be so cocksure all the time.
The point of all this is that religious dogmatism is so stubborn because we aren't dealing with rationality. We are working with an emotional system. Overtly, the conversation is about biblical texts or rational arguments. But at root what is governing the conversation is the feeling of knowing. And if the person feels they are right then quality counter-arguments just won't penetrate. The dominant emotional tone of conviction convinces the person that he is in the possession of the truth. That feeling drives the conversation.
Certainty and Dogmatism: The Feeling of Knowing