Is belief voluntary?

[glimpsing]

What do people think? Threads on here have had me pondering this. Some people have said they can't choose their beliefs or lack of them - they just occur or not. Yet society does commonly to hold people accountable for beliefs. There are all sorts of beliefs that are generally not socially acceptable. Personally I think we can choose what to belief, as we encounter new information we can either accept, dismiss it or withhold from forming an opinion on it (as we're not sure where it fits into a bigger picture).

We actively engage, but the choices we make in selecting how to actively engage are still inevitably influenced by nature and nurture. How could they not be? How can anything you do possibly not be influenced by your nature? Or by things you have learned, seen and experienced since birth?

Influenced but important to maintain not completely controlled by, in my opinion. Otherwise it would be impossible to overcome certain traumas or our world would be in danger of becoming like some science fiction dystopia with a form of genetic class system..

@BigFatLiar

A lot of what we believe is based on our upbringing.

If you'd been born to devout Muslims you'd almost certainly be brought up Muslim. Same if you were Hindu, Christian etc, relatively few question their belief and even those that do often still have it linger.
Most of question because we've been brought up that way.

Again, I acknowledge this influence but would avoid putting too much store in it as it is far too restrictive. And since conscious action is born out of belief this affects our own agency and power to act.

Otherwise it would be impossible to overcome certain traumas.

Why? There may often be things in our nature and in our experience which help is to overcome certain traumas.

@lazylinguist, granted but if all is put down to nature and nurture it will tempt many into viewing the human condition as being altogether too predictable and definable or at least potentially so. It creates prejudice.

I guess I don't really get what you mean when you suggest that there is anything else which drives our actions, our beliefs and our behaviour other than nature or nurture. Surely everything comes into one of those two categories? i.e. aspects that are an interent inbuilt part of us, and aspects which are created by what happens to us.

If your answer to that is 'free will', then surely that is in our nature?

@lazylinguist, ah ha, yes! That's the very distinction having Faith (or not) makes isn't it? The spiritual aspect - something that is seen as greater by believer than both nature or nurture. And the hope it gives me over people and situations is one reason why I continually choose to continue in my belief system.

So from this, does it actually logically follow that exercising faith actually empowers people more free (less bound by nature or nurture) to exercise choice over what they believe?

As in if someone believe they have little choice over what they believe they are less likely to exercise it. And if they have effectively less choice regarding what they believe how does that affect free will?

Just bouncing ideas around. Aware these ideas have strong implications.

That's the very distinction having Faith (or not) makes isn't it? The spiritual aspect - something that is seen as greater by believer than both nature or nurture.

You don't believe that the spiritual aspect is part of our nature then?

@lazylinguist

That's the very distinction having Faith (or not) makes isn't it? The spiritual aspect - something that is seen as greater by believer than both nature or nurture.

You don't believe that the spiritual aspect is part of our nature then?

I believe spirit can be separate and in some instances greater from individual identity, operating as a separate entity. Zeitgeist, for example, becomes an entity separate from the individuals responsible (in part) for feeding into it. It can be very powerful, for good or bad. People can get swept up into it.

Look at the way beliefs concerning gender identity has affected society, and in turn socialisation, for example.

So from this, does it actually logically follow that exercising faith actually empowers people more free (less bound by nature or nurture) to exercise choice over what they believe?

As in if someone believe they have little choice over what they believe they are less likely to exercise it. And if they have effectively less choice regarding what they believe how does that affect free will?

Sorry I'm not quite sure I understand what you're trying to say there! Nobody has more or less free will than anyone else. Nobody has more or less nature and nurture than anyone else.

When I say I'm not sure belief is necessarily a conscious choice, I don't mean that in the sense of lacking free will (e.g. if you were programned by god to believe in him). I mean in the sense that you arrive at your views and beliefs largely through a process of experience. Most people don't just one day decide "Right, I think I'll believe in god".

I find the concept of 'exercising faith' quite odd. Because although religious people obviously don't see it this way, it always sounds to me a bit like admitting that you're doggedly persisting in convincing yourself of something that you know deep down isn't actually true. If you actually knew it was true, why would you need faith?

Zeitgeist, for example, becomes an entity separate from the individuals responsible (in part) for feeding into it. It can be very powerful, for good or bad. People can get swept up into it.

But Zeitgeist isn't literally a spirit. It's just the prevailing ideas that are around at any particular time.

Look at the way beliefs concerning gender identity has affected society, and in turn socialisation, for example.

I think you are conflating two totally different meanings of the word 'spirit'. The supernatural one and the one that just means a mood.

There is an interesting Giles Fraser article about all this which I post here with an apology for the title- it is not really an article about JP, the JP bit just frames a discussion about the nature of belief and how willingness to believe relates to faith.

unherd.com/2021/08/does-jordan-peterson-believe-in-god/

When I say I'm not sure belief is necessarily a conscious choice, I don't mean that in the sense of lacking free will (e.g. if you were programned by god to believe in him). I mean in the sense that you arrive at your views and beliefs largely through a process of experience. Most people don't just one day decide "Right, I think I'll believe in god".

There is always a 'leap of faith' somewhere along the line. As no one can scientifically prove the existence of God or anything spiritual since they are not physical entities.

I find the concept of 'exercising faith' quite odd. Because although religious people obviously don't see it this way, it always sounds to me a bit like admitting that you're doggedly persisting in convincing yourself of something that you know deep down isn't actually true. If you actually knew it was true, why would you need faith?

Not being able to prove something is true is not the same as being able to prove it is false. And if there were two possible outcomes, good or bad, I choose to hope in what I believe is good. As you say, faith is required without proof.

Hebrews 11:1
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

So faith is borne out of hope and I believe is extremely powerful. Faith affects the scope of what we can believe. Belief informs our actions which in turn affects subsequent events and the world around us.

@lazylinguist

Zeitgeist, for example, becomes an entity separate from the individuals responsible (in part) for feeding into it. It can be very powerful, for good or bad. People can get swept up into it.

But Zeitgeist isn't literally a spirit. It's just the prevailing ideas that are around at any particular time.

Look at the way beliefs concerning gender identity has affected society, and in turn socialisation, for example.

I think you are conflating two totally different meanings of the word 'spirit'. The supernatural one and the one that just means a mood.

I think the word can be taken literally according to my belief system. The Zeitgeist becomes bigger than the individuals which feed it. Once it takes off it's like society as a whole can lose control of it, it is difficult to contain and people are swept up into it.

The supernatural one and the one that just means a mood.

I think a 'mood' can have a larger effect than people might predict. It becomes 'supernatural' because the effects are not necessarily understood, it cannot be quantified or easily measured as something physical or fully harnessed.

I’m not sure there always is a leap of faith, not for all people. I certainly don’t feel that way about my own experiences. I believe what I believe. 🤷🏻‍♀️ There was no conscious decision, I just have this strong innate feeling. I am not someone who would be easily recognised as religious (that it the bit that is, for me, self determined) but I certainly have faith.

Ok fair enough - you are using a broad meaning of the word then. To me there are spirits in the sense of ghosts or 'ethereal entities' or whatever, in which I absolutely don't believe. And then there is 'spirit' in the sense of mood. People can get 'carried away' - i.e. excited or enthused by any mood, feeling or atmosphere. I don't think that makes it a supernatural entity. It's generally caused by things people are saying and doing. Would you say that, for example 'team spirit' or 'community spirit' is an actual literal spiritual entity? Like the holy spirit, or like a ghost?

Would you say that, for example 'team spirit' or 'community spirit' is an actual literal spiritual entity? Like the holy spirit, or like a ghost?

Yes, I think I probably would, if it were tangible enough. Incidentally, my working theory of ghosts and haunting is in terms of an invasion into our thoughts which can actually manifest physically in terms of the way they affect our perceptions and brain physiology.

Not being able to prove something is true is not the same as being able to prove it is false

That is absolutely true. But the burden of proof is on the person who claims the existence of the thing. So if, for example, I said 'I believe in ogres', but there had never been a single shred of evidence that they exist, I think you would be very much justified in saying that we have to assume ogres don't exist unless I can prove otherwise.

Some religious people like to claim that atheism is a belief. Whereas most atheists will (rightly imo) point out that atheism is the absence of a belief (in god). If atheism is a belief, then thinking there's no such thing as fairies, unicorns, ghosts, dragons etc are also beliefs.

Yes, I think I probably would, if it were tangible enough.

Interesting, so something becomes an actual spirit once it reaches a certain level of intensity, but before that it's just a mood?

Incidentally, my working theory of ghosts and haunting is in terms of an invasion into our thoughts which can actually manifest physically in terms of the way they affect our perceptions and brain physiology.

So is the ghost literally there in tye physical world or not? Wpuld it be visible to more than one person (presumably not if it's just manifested from only one person's brain)?

Very interesting OP. Born a Catholic, raised a Catholic, Catholic schools & home life… only socialised with other Catholics until I was about 12…

I think having ideas or beliefs installed in you at a young age makes them very, very difficult to undo. As a child you believe what you are taught is ‘fact’ as you don’t have the skills to really differentiate between real & ‘beliefs’. You trust the adults in your life completely. So part of unpicking the beliefs is realising the people who instilled them are wrong or misguided. Which is difficult as they’re most often your own parents and/or community.

My logical brain knows it can’t be true, but there’s something in my that just can’t let go. Like Stockholm syndrome maybe?! I still feel shame and guilt over doing things I know the church wouldn’t ‘approve’ of, as a woman there are so many. I can’t help but believe I’m being ‘punished’ when things go badly for me, or feel like I’m letting God down all the time.

But then sometimes that means it spurs me on to do the ‘right’ thing. But then is is truly of my own volition? Does that mean I’m not actually a good person because I’m not choosing to do things without that influence?

I’ve forgotten the question now 🥴 but it really isn’t something that people raised without religion can understand. I have a hard time explaining it to DH whose view is simply, it’s silly to believe anything that isn’t based in scientific fact.

Interesting, so something becomes an actual spirit once it reaches a certain level of intensity, but before that it's just a mood?

Think so. It's very theoretical stuff. I don't fully understand it. However if you think about how strong emotions can affect the atmosphere of a place to tangible effect, I would say yes.

So is the ghost literally there in tye physical world or not? Wpuld it be visible to more than one person (presumably not if it's just manifested from only one person's brain)?

Yes, it would be present in the physical world as it would manifest into somebody's brain physiology as a result of biological responses. To more than one person? Depends how much one person can influence another. We can often sense moods, and that in turn affects us, for example.

I think having ideas or beliefs installed in you at a young age makes them very, very difficult to undo. As a child you believe what you are taught is ‘fact’ as you don’t have the skills to really differentiate between real & ‘beliefs’. You trust the adults in your life completely. So part of unpicking the beliefs is realising the people who instilled them are wrong or misguided. Which is difficult as they’re most often your own parents and/or community.
Ah, that is an experience that is different from mine. I always remember challenging what I was told from being tiny. At least in thought sometimes in action if I could get away with it! My beliefs differ from my parents which have evolved and changed over the years. But I wasn't brought up with regular church going. Baptised c of e (says it all!). My mother was a lapsed Catholic, my father has flipped between being atheist and (loosely) Christian.

Yes, it would be present in the physical world as it would manifest into somebody's brain physiology as a result of biological responses.

I'm not sure the brain experts would agree with you on that one...

@IHateCoronavirus

I’m not sure there always is a leap of faith, not for all people. I certainly don’t feel that way about my own experiences. I believe what I believe. 🤷🏻‍♀️ There was no conscious decision, I just have this strong innate feeling. I am not someone who would be easily recognised as religious (that it the bit that is, for me, self determined) but I certainly have faith.

But trusting your subconscious must involve a certain level of faith. Otherwise you would challenge or dismiss it.