ethics of belief

I don't know what Yazata is going to say, but personally I am baffled by your question since it seems like a no-brainer.

It should be possible to analyze even things that seem like "no-brainers."



@Fraggle --

Exactly.

We see the same thing in the paranoid conspiracy theorist. There's something in their lives that they can't control(say they had a bad run in with the law or something) and to cope with the complete lack of control they invent vast, far reaching conspiracies centered around the government(or a shadow government in the case of the NWOers) attempting to impede their lives. In a twisted way it gives them a complete sense of control as it is their actions which are driving this conspiracy, it's the ultimate power trip(well, not quite) as they are not only driving this conspiracy but staying "one step ahead" as well.

A good parallel can be drawn between this and beliefs in the afterlife as both share a number of traits in common. In both cases they give people a sense of control(conspiracy theorists gain "control" over their adversary and afterlife believers gain "control" over what happens after death). In both cases there's absolutely no evidence to support the belief(although conspiracy theories are slightly better evidenced than any afterlife). In both cases the belief tends to be irrefutable in that no amount of evidence or debating to the contrary will convince the believer, the conspiracy theorist will just accuse you of being "in on it" and the believer in the afterlife will just state that they "know it for truth".

Of course, I don't expect the believers in here to accept this analysis.

I'm not a believer and I don't accept that analysis either.


In both cases the belief tends to be irrefutable in that no amount of evidence or debating to the contrary will convince the believer, the conspiracy theorist will just accuse you of being "in on it" and the believer in the afterlife will just state that they "know it for truth".

This refusal to accept an alternative explanation may have little to do with the person's beliefs, and much much more with reactance.

Ie. a person may refuse to accept something as true or give it consideration simply because it is something someone else is telling them, and they perceive this as a limitation of their freedom and autonomy. It may be completely irrelevant what it is all about - it could be about dog poo, their spouse, the government or God.
 
@wynn --

I'm not a believer and I don't accept that analysis either.

Whether you agree with my analysis or not you can't deny that the two are quite similar, much like belief that god is talking to you is quite similar to the "imaginary friends" of many childhoods. Unlike many here I have more than enough points of commonality for my comparison to be valid, and the behavior of the two groups are quite similar, you can't deny that.

This refusal to accept an alternative explanation may have little to do with the person's beliefs, and much much more with reactance.

Sorry but reactance doesn't fit as well. It would fit if evidence to the contrary(of the conspiracy theory or the afterlife) would limit their behavior, but that's just not the case. Being an atheist(or rejecting conspiracy theories) doesn't limit your behavior at all. Case in point, I, as an atheist, am not prevented from engaging in religious activity(in fact I still go to church with my mother whenever I'm in town), it just makes it seem silly. I can still do everything I could as a christian(and more, so it's actually quite liberating), and I'm hardly special enough to be an exception to the rule.

No, your theory just doesn't fit observation.
 
Speculation based on common sense - 'seeming obvious' - is not empirical evidence.
How does one obtain empirical evidence about the human psyche? It's not like you can measure the "fear of death", or weigh the "desire for immortality". All you can do is talk to people and try to understand what makes them tick.

It may be useful to note that various "beliefs" in an afterlife tend to follow cultural lines.
 
Fraggle Rocker,


I don't know what Yazata is going to say, but personally I am baffled by your question since it seems like a no-brainer.


A no-brainer?
Really?
Let's see.


When people fear something that they have no control over, a typical response is the self-delusion that the thing is not actually real. Fantasy is a psychological defense mechanism.

1) illnesses/diseases such as cancer.
2) being horribly murded.
3) being tortured to death.
4) disasters such as plane crash, drowning, earthquake...
5) dying alone, helplessness.
6) leaving behind family, friends, business, unfinished issues...

We all accept that we are going to die, we just want it to be the way we
prefer, like going peacefully in our sleep after a long life.

The idea of the afterlife, or any fantasy, does nothing to quell our fears of death as we still have to die to realise them.


Every day millions of people cling to the fantasy that their dog didn't really dig up their neighbor's garden, that the county isn't really going to build a freeway half a block from their home, that their employer isn't really declaring bankruptcy, that their spouse didn't really desert them, that their child is not really in jail being charged with robbery, etc.


What does this have to do with anything?


The fantasy that they're not really going to die is even more popular and widespread than the ones I listed. Hundreds of millions of people delude themselves with it.


Evidence please?


jan.
 
Whether you agree with my analysis or not you can't deny that the two are quite similar, much like belief that god is talking to you is quite similar to the "imaginary friends" of many childhoods. Unlike many here I have more than enough points of commonality for my comparison to be valid, and the behavior of the two groups are quite similar, you can't deny that.
Wait. Now you are comparing it to imaginary friends? It is not clear that having imaginary friends is based on fear or control issues. Further those who have them tend to be higher in intelligence and language skills.

Let me put forward a counter hypothesis:
the main reason theists believe in the afterlife is social/familial/cultural. They were raised in the religion. Their parents are in this religion. Many, or even most of their friends and acquaintances are in that religion.

Just like most people - see my new thread on atheists and the persistent self - they accept many of the beliefs they are raised in.

The fear of death may present a kind of bolstering of this belief in the after life, but it is not the primary cause.

And note: as long as we are speculating from common sense....

I think there is a reason atheists have the mistaken belief that the primary reason theists believe has to do with fear of death - it reflects back well on them.

Most people are afraid of death.
Theists believe in an afterlife because they cannot face their fear.
Atheists also fear death, but....

I am sure you can finish this self-compliment.
 
How does one obtain empirical evidence about the human psyche?
Are you suggesting that we don't need to do psychological research any more, that all of that can be replaced by some fairly intelligent people speculating together from common sense? Are you also now opening the door for people to use non-empirical methods to support their beliefs or will this likely continue to be a problem for you in other contexts when it is not you and like minded people doing the speculating?



It's not like you can measure the "fear of death", or weigh the "desire for immortality". All you can do is talk to people and try to understand what makes them tick.
Precisely. And if you do this systematically, you can collect empirical evidence.

It may be useful to note that various "beliefs" in an afterlife tend to follow cultural lines.
I agree. I think that is primary cause of belief in the afterlife, by far and away. They are brought up in the belief, they parents, families and communities have this belief. It is part of a network of beliefs that support and are supported by it.

But I do think there is a psychological reason atheists think the main reason is fear of death, as long as we are speculating.
 
@Pineal --

Wait. Now you are comparing it to imaginary friends? It is not clear that having imaginary friends is based on fear or control issues. Further those who have them tend to be higher in intelligence and language skills.

Nice straw man argument. You'll notice that my post is not comparing belief in an afterlife to childhood imaginary friends, as evidenced by my use of the phrase "much like" in my sentence. You'll note that I did not say "belief in an afterlife is like imaginary friends". No, what I said was, and I'm quoting exactly here:

"Whether you agree with my analysis or not you can't deny that the two are quite similar, much like belief that god is talking to you is quite similar to the "imaginary friends" of many childhoods."

In no way does that sentence compare belief in an afterlife to imaginary friends.

Come on man, I know that you can do better than this. I typically like your posts and find them at least slightly insightful. This is a low that I've never seen you sink to before.

the main reason theists believe in the afterlife is social/familial/cultural. They were raised in the religion. Their parents are in this religion. Many, or even most of their friends and acquaintances are in that religion.

That would work if we didn't find similar beliefs among people not raised in them as well as in all social and economic groups. There is one common factor between the two groups though and it's a very likely cause of the behavior, the fear of death. You don't need two causes to explain this one phenomenon, one underlying cause is enough and the "fear of death" explanation is powerful enough to account for all such afterlife beliefs.

Parsimony my dear friend, parsimony.

The fear of death may present a kind of bolstering of this belief in the after life, but it is not the primary cause.

But the socio/economic/familial factors aren't enough to account for all such cases, therefore you have implicitly posited two completely different causes for the same phenomenon. Such poor form is unexpected from you.

I think there is a reason atheists have the mistaken belief that the primary reason theists believe has to do with fear of death - it reflects back well on them.

Most people are afraid of death.
Theists believe in an afterlife because they cannot face their fear.
Atheists also fear death, but....

I am sure you can finish this self-compliment.

Hell, I'm busy dealing with my fear of death just like any theist, the only difference is that being an atheist means that I have less of it to deal with than when I was a christian. Not having the threat of eternal damnation and torture hanging over me likely has something to do with that(well, that and having been declared medically dead on three occasions and damn close to it a number of other times).

Of all of the possibilities for what happens after death I have to say that I like the atheist one the best, I didn't exist before I was born either and it didn't inconvenience me then. Of course, it does help that this is the only possibility that we have any evidence for.
 
Sorry but reactance doesn't fit as well. It would fit if evidence to the contrary(of the conspiracy theory or the afterlife) would limit their behavior, but that's just not the case.

You will need to explain this.


Because the pattern for reactance is something like this:

A has belief X.
B challenges belief X.
A has reactance.
A's belief that X is true strenghtens.



Which is a readily obsevable patterns among people, whether they be theists or atheists.
 
We all accept that we are going to die, we just want it to be the way we
prefer, like going peacefully in our sleep after a long life.

Exactly.

I am very concerned for the case that I would not outlive my cat. What will happen to her if I die before her? Who will take care of her, and well enough??



The idea of the afterlife, or any fantasy, does nothing to quell our fears of death as we still have to die to realise them.

On principle, yes.
Although there is something to say for the power of distraction. Daydreaming can, at least temporarily, relieve our various concerns by distracting us from them.
 
@wynn --

Again, reactance deals with supposed limitations of previously free behavior. Arguing over the existence of god, or the validity of of a conspiracy theory, in no way threatens to restrict previously free behavior. How much clearer do I have to be?!? This is from your own goddamn link!
 
I agree. I think that is primary cause of belief in the afterlife, by far and away. They are brought up in the belief, they parents, families and communities have this belief. It is part of a network of beliefs that support and are supported by it.

The question still remains why and how the belief in an afterlife first arose, and why it caught on.
 
Again, reactance deals with supposed limitations of previously free behavior. Arguing over the existence of god, or the validity of of a conspiracy theory, in no way threatens to restrict previously free behavior.

It does precisely that.


Telling someone that what they believe is wrong, or even just implying such, can be understood as a threat, a demand for change of behavior.
 
@wynn --

Telling someone that what they believe is wrong, or even just implying such, can be understood as a threat, a demand for change of behavior.

Oh come on, now you're just grasping for straws.

No, the fear of death works much better as an explanation than reactance does.
 
Telling someone that what they believe is wrong, or even just implying such, can be understood as a threat, a demand for change of behavior.

It is the theists that are telling us that we are wrong, not the other way around.
 
It is the theists that are telling us that we are wrong, not the other way around.

You have never told a theist that they are wrong, nor have you ever seen an atheist tell a theist that they are wrong?
 
Back
Top