fatherman Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 The more we learn about genetics, the less I believe in free will. It's interesting to me that I come from a family of believers for many generations on my Dad's side. And my wife's dad's side as well. But my son has been an atheist since he was in preschool. He might always be one (15 now) I think it's just the way he's made. So was I born a believer? Could I be anything else than that? I believe science will know the answer to that in my lifetime. Maybe Calvin was right? Maybe God chooses. #whoadidijustsaythat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soma Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 I feel the living universe is composed of energy and that energy carries information, which we could call consciousness. There is a scientist who as a new theory that the cell is not controlled by DNA the code for our human program, but by stimulus registered on the membrane of the cell and the cell responds to it, which is cause and effect. The same scientist says that consciousness is in micro tubules, which separates it from the universal consciosness so we have individual identities. I believe this living universe can be labeled as God so we can use science or theology to talk about what is beyond our encapsulated brains, which have limitations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulS Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 The more we learn about genetics, the less I believe in free will. It's interesting to me that I come from a family of believers for many generations on my Dad's side. And my wife's dad's side as well. But my son has been an atheist since he was in preschool. He might always be one (15 now) I think it's just the way he's made. So was I born a believer? Could I be anything else than that? I believe science will know the answer to that in my lifetime. Maybe Calvin was right? Maybe God chooses. #whoadidijustsaythat Neither you nor you son are being arbitrary which seems to reinforce that neither of you are 'choosing' belief, but rather that you either believe, or you don't. It's not like choosing between hot and cold where you know which does what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apexcone Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 (edited) Our beliefs are supported by our World View. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view To change ones beliefs one has to make adjustments to our World View, if we don't we experience Cognitive Dissidence. http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html Edited June 5, 2015 by apexcone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveS55 Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Thanks for posting those articles, apex. The Wikipedia article mentions that one's "worldview" is conditioned by beliefs and values we take as axioms, that we argue "from". I think that's what makes beliefs so intractable; they are axiomatic and lay the foundation for a worldview that can only change when one experiences cognitive dissonance. I remember studying Leon Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance in college. I thought it was fascinating then and it still rings true today. So, I personally think it's beneficial to examine all of our beliefs from time to time in light of new information. Honestly, I think one can be perfectly happy with absolutely no beliefs at all, although I don't know if that's possible. It seems to me that otherwise, we will always be troubled by our cognitive dissonance. Steve 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted June 13, 2015 Author Share Posted June 13, 2015 Fatherman As far as I can see we (and our beliefs etc) are a reflection of our environment. ie What we have: read, experienced, been taught. learnt, have eaten and imbibed. Plus various combinations thereof and no doubt other factors. Seeing genetics as somehow separate is a useful separation, but it does no harm to think of it a reflection of our (deep) past environment. The others above are just reflections of a more immediate environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minsocal Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 What am I saying when I declare "I believe"? Well, that can get a bit complicated. What begins with two words ends up linking to assumptions I make when I utter the statement and then to assumptions you make when you interpret those same two words. If my assumptions do not match your assumptions, then difficulties often arise. If dialogue continues rather than terminates, then an important goal has been reached. Perhaps both parties gain from the exchange and that is even better. An example: I will say that I believe that there is a God (yes, I do). I have not said anything about the nature of God nor have I said anything about how I reached that conclusion ... but, I would like to have that conversation! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) I get what you are saying - our assumptions can be: axioms definitions self evident truths ... if there are such things. In between our assumptions and our beliefs we have corroborating evidence and logic though. I would hope; otherwise our assumptions simply become our beliefs. Edited June 14, 2015 by romansh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetGo Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 As a few of you shared, I too am frustrated by a rigidness that is often received during verbal/writen discourse around belief. That knee jerk and invalidating response of 'you are wrong' is not uplifting. I try to remember that this behavior and response are about them. Mine are about me. I certainly have sensitive vulnerabilities - for example, a tendancy to self-identify as inferior. As I work to replace that concept, I find that I am back on a spiritual path and with a need to share and learn with/from others. Problem is, it is often ineffable, and the words just get in the way when I try. I am still trying, and hope these forums will be a safe place for me to grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Something Marcus Borg brings out in one of his books (I think it is, "The Heart of Christianity") is that the English word "believe" actually goes back to the word "belove." We interpret the word "believe" as "I give my mental assent to", whereas "belove" means "I give my heart to." The first is, metaphorically, a matter of the head which doesn't require much action as a response. The second is, metaphorically, a matter of the heart that does require action as a response. I am the first to say that I find it difficult to give my heart to something that my head rejects. I tend to be a rationalist. But when I say that I believe in my wife, this doesn't mean that I am convinced that she exists (although I am - ha ha). It doesn't mean that I can recite a bunch of facts about her (although I can - ha ha). It means that I am in a trusting relationship with her. To say that I believe in my wife goes to her character. And because I believe in her, there is action required on my part in order to keep the relationship ongoing and healthy. Word-meanings change over time. In our modern age, truth seems to depend upon factual analysis. I'm not against factual truth at all. But I also think that truths of what we be-love have powerful transformative effects in our lives. And it makes me wonder what would happen if we went from "believers" to "be-lovers"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.