![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
It's not that people like Christians and my brother are crazy; they aren't particularly irrational compared to me, but that they are drawn to believe different things from what I'm drawn to believe. They have a different outlook on things based on the things they believe, and based on the things they are drawn to believe, and based on the things they are drawn to disbelieve. I'm sure many other people would perceive me as "crazy" based on my reasons for being vegan.
I have a hard time reading/watching/listening to the things that Bro provides in order to share his beliefs with me. I have a hard time, because I am inclined to disbelieve those things. Instead of reading/watching/listening with an open mind, and then deciding whether I agree or disagree, my mind fights the information from the get-go. I am skeptical, and my mind disputes the input as it receives the input, constantly looking for ways to disprove the input. That is why it feels stressful.
There was a time a few years back, where I thought it would be useful to have read the Bible, to know exactly what it says, to be able to respond in an informed manner to other people who quote it or claim to believe it. But there didn't seem much point in reading the whole thing, and being left with an overall impression of disbelief, without being able to explain to others the details of why I disbelieved. So I took notes and wrote down my reactions to every bit I read... it was tedious, and I didn't like the stuff I was reading, so I soon lost interest and decided it wasn't worthwhile to continue.
I have the same approach when reading/watching/listening to things which I'm drawn to disbelieve. I want to take mental notes on which parts don't make sense to me, and why, so that I can argue or at least explain my position.
But the thing is, that I either tend to believe, or tend to disbelieve, things, before I even get into their details. It doesn't matter what the details are, because my beliefs are set already. My mind has to be receptive to believing something, before it will accept things as plausible.
In order to get past that barrier, you have to be exposed to the ideas many times... I recall reading about that. You can't expect people to change their beliefs the first time you tell them something; it has to get past their internal resistance, and sometimes it takes being exposed to a foreign idea many times, until it becomes more familiar and until the person is receptive to believing it.
But how much of that is a careful analysis of the input data? Is belief only a matter of what someone is drawn to believe / instinct, and/or a matter of being familiar with an idea, as opposed to actual analysis of input data?
I have a hard time reading/watching/listening to the things that Bro provides in order to share his beliefs with me. I have a hard time, because I am inclined to disbelieve those things. Instead of reading/watching/listening with an open mind, and then deciding whether I agree or disagree, my mind fights the information from the get-go. I am skeptical, and my mind disputes the input as it receives the input, constantly looking for ways to disprove the input. That is why it feels stressful.
There was a time a few years back, where I thought it would be useful to have read the Bible, to know exactly what it says, to be able to respond in an informed manner to other people who quote it or claim to believe it. But there didn't seem much point in reading the whole thing, and being left with an overall impression of disbelief, without being able to explain to others the details of why I disbelieved. So I took notes and wrote down my reactions to every bit I read... it was tedious, and I didn't like the stuff I was reading, so I soon lost interest and decided it wasn't worthwhile to continue.
I have the same approach when reading/watching/listening to things which I'm drawn to disbelieve. I want to take mental notes on which parts don't make sense to me, and why, so that I can argue or at least explain my position.
But the thing is, that I either tend to believe, or tend to disbelieve, things, before I even get into their details. It doesn't matter what the details are, because my beliefs are set already. My mind has to be receptive to believing something, before it will accept things as plausible.
In order to get past that barrier, you have to be exposed to the ideas many times... I recall reading about that. You can't expect people to change their beliefs the first time you tell them something; it has to get past their internal resistance, and sometimes it takes being exposed to a foreign idea many times, until it becomes more familiar and until the person is receptive to believing it.
But how much of that is a careful analysis of the input data? Is belief only a matter of what someone is drawn to believe / instinct, and/or a matter of being familiar with an idea, as opposed to actual analysis of input data?