Why would people believe in something which are not proven?

[Heyo]

All humans are scared

Yep. At least most and US citizens more than anyone else.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yep. At least most and US citizens more than anyone else.

Yeah, that is how it works right now, but it doesn't mean I don't hope for it to get better.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Take 2:
"Sorry I just don't see the value in dissecting a huge post of which the ultimate aim is to question literaly everything," I accept that - I will point you that you don't literally see it. It is a combination of thoughts and feelings.

"including those things supported by huge amounts of evidence, just because we have to use our brains to process things." And there it is! You switch to a "we" and apply your own thinking to all other humans, while taking your own thinking for granted.

"I think it's simply silly, unproductive nonsense to suggest that "rationality" isn't actually rational..." Rational is not a force like gravity or a thing like a rock. It is a continuum of human behavior.

"because we figured out using our brains what the difference between rational and irrational is." And there it is again. Your rationally is in part unique to you because of what you take for granted. Mine is different, but they are both a part of the continuum. You and I are not a "we", when we look closer.
Stop talking for a "we", that is nothing but a result of your nature and nurture and then assume it must be the same for all other humans.

Science has limits: A few things that science does not do
This is in part the limit of rationality and empirical evidence.

Again, this is just debating for the sake of debating.

Everyting you "complain" about concerning rationality can also be said about mathematics.

I don't see the merrit.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

paarsurrey said: ↑
Why would people believe in something which are not proven?

Life starts with trust/faith/belief in something and it is but natural to do so.
One should continue doing so unless it is proven wrong. Isn't it reasonable, please?

No, it's never reasonable to "just believe" things until they are shown wrong.
That's how you get conned.

Didn't one trust one's parents in an early age whatever they told one, please?

Yes, toddlers have an instinctive trait of blindly trusting what the "grown ups" are saying. This is why it's so easy to get kids to believe in santa.

Most children grow out of that when they get older.


To thinking adults, trust is earned based on data and circumstance. Not simply "given" blindly.

This is why when I get an email from a Nigerian Prince who wants to give me gold, I move it into my spam box.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Again, this is just debating for the sake of debating.

Everyting you "complain" about concerning rationality can also be said about mathematics.

I don't see the merrit.

Yes, check out Gödel and this one.
Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

That you don't assign merit to that is in you. But if you follow truth and its limit, it has merit.
In me is, that I assign merit to truth and its limit.
But here is the joke:
You can't decide with rationality alone between your and my position. Nor can I, but I am honest and admit that.
So what now?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, check out Gödel and this one.
Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

That you don't assign merit to that is in you. But if you follow truth and its limit, it has merit.
In me is, that I assign merit to truth and its limit.
But here is the joke:
You can't decide with rationality alone between your and my position. Nor can I, but I am honest and admit that.
So what now?

Now nothing.
I'm not even sure what you are complaining about or arguing against.

Meanwhile all the actual points I made in that original reply to you, remain unadressed.

 

[paarsurrey]

No, it's never reasonable to "just believe" things until they are shown wrong.
That's how you get conned.

Yes, toddlers have an instinctive trait of blindly trusting what the "grown ups" are saying. This is why it's so easy to get kids to believe in santa.

Most children grow out of that when they get older.

To thinking adults, trust is earned based on data and circumstance. Not simply "given" blindly.

This is why when I get an email from a Nigerian Prince who wants to give me gold, I move it into my spam box.

Is there any adult who was never a child?
It is in the childhood that the foundation of an adult is laid. Right, please?

Regards

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Is there any adult who was never a child?
It is in the childhood that the foundation of an adult is laid. Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

View attachment 37293

I don't get one. Please elaborate.
Regards

 

[Mock Turtle]

I don't get one. Please elaborate.
Regards

He means you don't seem to understand (or have taken in) what he has written.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't get one. Please elaborate.
Regards

My point was that children are gullible spunges that are biologically hardwired to trust their elders pretty much unconditionally. This is why it is so easy to make kids believe in santa.

My second point was that as humans grow older, into adulthood, they shed this gullibility of and replace it with rational analysis of the things they are being told. This is why it's impossible to make adults believe in santa.

My third, implied, point was that people who "just believe" things "until proven wrong", haven't completely shed off this childish behaviour of gullibility. And thus have some more mental maturing to do.


Given your 2 question-reply, it seems as if you missed all 3 of these points.

 

[firedragon]

Faith - strong belief in something which are not proven.
Proven - demonstrated by evidence or argument to be true or existing.
Believe - accept that (something) is true.
Belief - an acceptance that something exists or is true.

(1) If something is not proven, as in not demonstrated by evidence or argument to be true or existing, why would someone believe that something is true/exist?

(2) Why would someone have strong belief in something which are not proven?

(3) Is it rational if one believe in something which are not proven?

(4) Is it rational if one have strong belief in something which are not proven?

(5) What reason can cause one to believe something is true/exist?

(6) What reason will cause one to believe something is true/exist?

Edit:
Definition of Faith:
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something
2. Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.

(I might not be participate in this discussion, so please feel free to discuss/debate with other people here.)

Maybe some people find evidence you would never accept by default.

 

[paarsurrey]

My point was that children are gullible spunges that are biologically hardwired to trust their elders pretty much unconditionally. This is why it is so easy to make kids believe in santa.

My second point was that as humans grow older, into adulthood, they shed this gullibility of and replace it with rational analysis of the things they are being told. This is why it's impossible to make adults believe in santa.

My third, implied, point was that people who "just believe" things "until proven wrong", haven't completely shed off this childish behaviour of gullibility. And thus have some more mental maturing to do.


Given your 2 question-reply, it seems as if you missed all 3 of these points.

"they shed this gullibility of and replace it with rational analysis of the things they are being told"

And that was my point exactly. Right, please?

Regards

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

"they shed this gullibility of and replace it with rational analysis of the things they are being told"

And that was my point exactly. Right, please?

Regards

You didn't make a point.
You asked 2 seemingly irrelevant questions instead.

If you have a point, then make it.

 

[Nimos]

We're trying to make sense of this thing called life -why we have a conscious understanding of who we are, and what our future holds. It seems cold, that nature would allow a creature to be smart enough to acknowledge it's own imminent death here, so we hope for justice in repairing this natural flaw, with the hope of everlasting life with a God of Justice through hope and compassion.

...Otherwise, it all seems unfair and too cruel.

We all do it, but then again we are often irrational beings. So nothing wrong with believing in things not yet proven, especially if they are not harmful. But I wouldn't call it rational to do so. So at least to me the answer is obviously no.

 

[paarsurrey]

You didn't make a point.
You asked 2 seemingly irrelevant questions instead.

If you have a point, then make it.

I said in my post #23:

"Life starts with trust/faith/belief in something and it is but natural to do so.
One should continue doing so unless it is proven wrong. Isn't it reasonable, please?"

Which is the same thing as one told "they shed this gullibility of and replace it with rational analysis of the things".
Please reflect again. Right, please?
Regards

 

[Muffled]

I suppose the proof would have to be scientific. I accept the Bible as proof of God but many do not.

 

[Muffled]

I have not yet met a theist who does not have any evidence for their beliefs.
My disagreeing with their evidence is besides the point.
It is still evidenced.


Proven to whom?
Please give an example of someone who believes something they have not proven to themself.

I don't believe self delusion is proof.

 

[Muffled]

A lot of people believe there is no God but do not have the evidence to prove it.

I believe it must be difficult to keep believing something doesn't exist when so many people say it does.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I believe it must be difficult to keep believing something doesn't exist when so many people say it does.

Quite easy actually, but perhaps it takes more strength of character to do so than just conforming - if it just makes more sense to one.