• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

My One Belief

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
All this silly arguing over what atheists believe made me analyze what it is that I actually do believe. What are the positions I hold that are purely a matter of belief?

Through analysis, I'm pretty sure I've narrowed it down to one specific belief that any other of my beliefs are based on:

I believe rationality is better than irrationality.

I'm pretty sure any of my other basic beliefs are still based on this fundamental belief. Truth is better than falsehood. Knowledge is better than ignorance. These are still beliefs, but their merits can be argued rationally.

However, the belief that rationality is better than irrationality cannot be broken down any more, and, in addition, even to rationally argue the merits of the belief, you have to believe that rationality is better than irrationality.

So it seems that when it comes to beliefs that cannot be rationally supported, I do hold one.
 

The Neo Nerd

Well-Known Member
Hi Kilgore Trout,

I am in almost total agreement with you on this.

I would like to put forward the following argument against the need for rationality over irrationality ALL the time.

WARNING: PSYCHO BABBLE ALERT

Humans being emotional beings irrationality is par for the course. But in some cases when someone has undergone a traumatic experience they will use what freud calls "Defense Mechanisms"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_mechanisms

These are basically irrational mental gymnastics employed by the person to help them deal with the trauma and as such psychologists/counsellors/therapists are advised not to strip a client of their defenses until they have come up with some more appropriate coping strategies.

So that being said irrationality isn't always such a bad thing.

But back to your point and i guess you're saying that in religious belief rationality is preferable to irrationality. That being said it is not an easy path to follow i know from my own journey from theism to atheism i had a lot of guilt and a lot of fear. I eventually dealt with it but for a while there my atheism was not too strong.
 

Engyo

Prince of Dorkness!
Then, the only real problem is when what seems eminently rational to someone else seems like a crock-o-crazy to you, or vice versa.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
Hi Kilgore Trout,

I am in almost total agreement with you on this.

I would like to put forward the following argument against the need for rationality over irrationality ALL the time.

WARNING: PSYCHO BABBLE ALERT

Humans being emotional beings irrationality is par for the course. But in some cases when someone has undergone a traumatic experience they will use what freud calls "Defense Mechanisms"

Defence mechanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These are basically irrational mental gymnastics employed by the person to help them deal with the trauma and as such psychologists/counsellors/therapists are advised not to strip a client of their defenses until they have come up with some more appropriate coping strategies.

So that being said irrationality isn't always such a bad thing.

But back to your point and i guess you're saying that in religious belief rationality is preferable to irrationality. That being said it is not an easy path to follow i know from my own journey from theism to atheism i had a lot of guilt and a lot of fear. I eventually dealt with it but for a while there my atheism was not too strong.

Oh, this isn't limited to religious beliefs by any measure - it's equally pervasive in all aspects of my life and worldviews. It's probably the most relevant example here though.

Even in the case of allowing people to deal with traumatic issues irrationally, the argument can still be made that this is done because it is the most rational course of action. The overarching purpose of the treatment is rational. So, the fundamental belief that rationality is better than irrationality still holds in terms of the overall situation.

Good example for thought though.
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
All this silly arguing over what atheists believe made me analyze what it is that I actually do believe. What are the positions I hold that are purely a matter of belief?

Through analysis, I'm pretty sure I've narrowed it down to one specific belief that any other of my beliefs are based on:

I believe rationality is better than irrationality.

I'm pretty sure any of my other basic beliefs are still based on this fundamental belief. Truth is better than falsehood. Knowledge is better than ignorance. These are still beliefs, but their merits can be argued rationally.

However, the belief that rationality is better than irrationality cannot be broken down any more, and, in addition, even to rationally argue the merits of the belief, you have to believe that rationality is better than irrationality.

So it seems that when it comes to beliefs that cannot be rationally supported, I do hold one.

Hypocrite!!!! :)p)
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, to be clear it can be rationally supported, but without the assumption that rationality is better than irrationality, the arguments are meaningless.

Jerk.

I believe rationality is better than irrationality.

The only real problem I see with your philosophy is that it seems to suggest that these are the only two options we get.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist

The only real problem I see with your philosophy is that it seems to suggest that these are the only two options we get.


If I say bananas are better than oranges, does that suggest you can't eat an apple?

What other alternatives do you see in regards to rationality?
 

No Good Boyo

engineering prostitute
As an atheist I try and avoid discussions with peoploe on what I "believe " in. When pressed I will answer : I believe in living a good life, doing the best I can do at everything I try, being nice to people, and raise my children to the very best of my ability so they will hopefully turn out to be fine upstanding people with good moral values. That said, the discussion is brief.

It's the debates about what I don't believe in is what draws me here :D
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
If I say bananas are better than oranges, does that suggest you can't eat an apple?

It depends on whether or not you're exclusively concerning yourself with bananas and oranges or whether you're trying to come up with a way of making determinations about the entire produce section.

What other alternatives do you see in regards to rationality?

Intuition for one. Rationality/irrationality are functions of the conscious mind, whereas intuition is something else.

Intuition, all by itself, is neither rational or irrational.

Someone can say, "I have a feeling God exists" and all by itself this is neither a rational or irrational statement because the person saying it isn't making any claims about the existence of God, just about their own feelings.

If they take it a step further and say something like, "I have a feeling God exists therefore God must exist" now they're being irrational. They're trying to translate a feeling into a thought and most people don't speak either language well enough to do that effectively.

Even so, if someone chooses to come to irrational conclusions based on an intuitive feeling, that says nothing at all about the rationality/irrationality of intuition itself, just about the way people react to it.

Intuition is neither rational nor irrational, its it's own completely separate thing. It's a third alternative (although "alternative" suggests a disregard of the other options. "Supplement" would probably be a better word.)
 
Last edited:

smokeybear

Member

Rationality is based on reason which is based on cultural influences.

Our culture is conditioned by materialism -- the belief that only matter and its inherent energy exist.

Therefore, reason and its inherent rationality reflects this belief system.

This is why those who subscribe to materialism cannot rationally accept phenomena outside matter and its inherent energy. The suggestion of such is concluded as "irrational."

Any suggestion of non-material phenomena is considered irrational, not because such phenomena may exist, but because this proposal does not fit within the belief of materialism.

What is rational to an ancient Greek would be irrational to us and visa-versa.

Do gods really control the forces of the universe? Surely you jest.

All jesting aside, in our materialistic culture of extavavagance and excessiveness, where those who are most rational control what ideas are worshiped and what ideas are scorned, smokeybear would much rather be irrational.


.
 

Frank Merton

Active Member
Any suggestion of non-material phenomena is considered irrational, not because such phenomena may exist, but because this proposal does not fit within the belief of materialism.

All jesting aside, in our materialistic culture of extravagance and excessiveness, where those who are most rational control what ideas are worshiped and what ideas are scorned, smokeybear would much rather be irrational.
Modern materialism is better called "physicalism," both to incorporate our modern understanding that matter is but a form of energy and to avoid confusion with the more common meaning of the word to mean excessive desire for material possessions.

I think you may also confuse this with rationalism. Physicalism can be defined as, "All that exists is space/time and matter/energy." Rationalism is really hard to define, but we understand that it refers to an attitude that we don't accept ideas that involve intuition, faith, and things like that, but only things we infer from repeated experience and deduce using logic about these experiences.

While many physicalists boast of their rationalism, in the end physicalism is hard to defend rationally, since it asserts something we can hardly be sure of. I would say that physicalism is rational, but non-physical ideas (such as modern philosophical approaches to the mental phenomena known as qualia) are also rational.
 
I believe rationality is better than irrationality.

The only real problem I see with your philosophy is that it seems to suggest that these are the only two options we get.

Well spoken, sir!

The metaphor of physical dimensions has always been my favorite when discussing this issue. Assuming that one must be either rational or irrational -- or some mixture thereof -- is like saying that there are only two dimensions: length and width. They either ignore or affirmatively deny the possibility that height exists. Try and speak to them of height, and they say, "Show me this 'height' you speak of [but only in terms of length and width] and I'll believe in it." Some people can get downright nasty about it.

Well over a hundred years old, Flatland, by Edwin Abbott, continues to be an enlightening book on the folly of materialistic thinking.
 
Last edited:

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
I believe rationality is better than irrationality.
By what measure are you comparing them to say that one is "better"?

I suspect that "rationality" is carrying a heavy load in this sentence as well. What makes for "rationality"? Reducible to shared sensory experience? Strict materialism?
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
All this silly arguing over what atheists believe made me analyze what it is that I actually do believe. What are the positions I hold that are purely a matter of belief?

Through analysis, I'm pretty sure I've narrowed it down to one specific belief that any other of my beliefs are based on:

I believe rationality is better than irrationality.

I'm pretty sure any of my other basic beliefs are still based on this fundamental belief. Truth is better than falsehood. Knowledge is better than ignorance. These are still beliefs, but their merits can be argued rationally.

However, the belief that rationality is better than irrationality cannot be broken down any more, and, in addition, even to rationally argue the merits of the belief, you have to believe that rationality is better than irrationality.

So it seems that when it comes to beliefs that cannot be rationally supported, I do hold one.

Define Rationality :facepalm:

Here's some scenerio's to test your beliefs. :D

Irrationality if its a real word is far more fun.:)

The reality is you should never base you life on one inflexible belief. The building will eventually come down hard. If you chose to use one belief it had better be flexible. A better bet is to have multiple beliefs as the structure then if one falls the others still hold you up in place.

I hope that this is rational enough with a proper amount of irrationality.:foot:
 

Frank Merton

Active Member
The reality is you should never base you life on one inflexible belief. The building will eventually come down hard. If you chose to use one belief it had better be flexible. A better bet is to have multiple beliefs as the structure then if one falls the others still hold you up in place.
I'm not sure how serious you are with that, but it is not possible for a sane person to actually carry out your program.

When your boss tells you that you are fired, you may not like it, but you will nevertheless believe it, and nothing will hold you up.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
I'm not sure how serious you are with that, but it is not possible for a sane person to actually carry out your program.

When your boss tells you that you are fired, you may not like it, but you will nevertheless believe it, and nothing will hold you up.

It is very much possible as I apply it to my life. Second it has nothing to do with day to day beliefs. It applies only to a foundation belief.
 
Top