Sometimes. people have no desire to change, so what do you do? I would just walk away and let them believe exactly, what they want to believe. Some people are not open to learning!
Barbara: most of the time people are resistant to changing their beliefs. One of the points above is that if you apply some Science here, that you can get people to change their Beliefs, both directly and indirectly...
The ice berg analogy in my opinion makes a lot of sense and when I applied this idea to my own belief system and thought about it, I can't think of a better comparison. I have spent a great deal of time academically and personally researching epistemology, the physiological and psychological aspects of forming beliefs, and how we differentiate fact from belief, working and long term memory, subliminal messaging, motivation, and emotion. I am by no means an authority on these topics, but I do hold a degree in psychology/neuroscience. Dan made an observation/question that I see frequently, "In short, why would you be interested in what other people believe? That’s their game and their problems. Wouldn’t it be wiser to resolve one’s own dead ends first?" I believe Dan raises a valid point especially with regard to one's freedom of autonomy in forming their own homogenous understanding of their own belief system. It does not seem noble to try and reshape another persons belief system. This raises a question, if someone develops a belief system shaped by experience and maybe genetics that leads them to experiencing above average levels of stress, depression, perhaps borderline personality disorder, phobia, etc..., would it be unethical to help that person develop beliefs that might help them to understand themselves and the world they interact with? Is there a benefit to assist them to develop a cohesive understanding, self-esteem, self efficacy, and self control? Is it wrong to help them find a belief system where they might feel better accepted and in turn accept a society that is quick to stigmatize a person that present themselves in a way that may seem awkward to others? As for how people form beliefs, it is the subliminal memory that is most vulnerable to intrusive influence and we should try and remember this to protect our minds especially today where we see the intended creation of cognitive dissonance that is encouraging the gradual influence to learned helplessness. When someone feels helpless they are now ripe for conditioning. Should a bad actor be pulling the levers of manipulation pertaining to the beliefs of the completely unaware victim('s) I would argue that this is no less than brain rape. For this reason, I completely understand why Dan seems to believe trying to fix a persons misconception is a bad idea. To lend credibility to this post first it is important to understand that the mainstream tells us subliminal messaging is mildly effective at best. I would argue that if this is the case, why are tools like Project Illicit, a website managed by Harvard that has been employed for public use to determine ones illicit bias in terms of race especially along the lines of microaggressions. This tool utilizes the same memory forming areas of the brain that are used in subliminal memory formation. The ethics involved in subliminal marketing and mind control are a huge public concern; therefore, would it behoove a perpetrator to debunk research like James Vicary in his pop-corn and Coke experiment. Edward Bernays (Sigmund Freud's nephew) worked with the US Government in the 1940's and 50's in utilizing commercial media and specialized media that Bernays says "Knowledge of how to use this enormous amplifying system becomes a matter of primary concern to those who are interested in socially constructive action." There are books on this subject that have mysteriously gone away and forgotten (I think I used to know someone who actually came across some of these books, but maybe they made it up) as well as copious amounts of research that is classified and or withheld which further perpetuates research that relegates subliminal messaging's effectiveness to be minimal or a myth. Neuroscience research with the advent of fMRI and other technologies has discovered certain brain functions like thalamus filtering which demonstrates how information is forwarded to other processing regions of the brain and this is just scratching the surface of what has been learned. Whether you believe what I have shared is accurate will be interpreted by your own experience and beliefs, that is our God given right. So I have a question for Dan, if you suspected a friend or loved one to have formed a belief or system of beliefs that might cause that person stress, self-harm, or harm to others, would you want to try and help that person? John, I thank you for writing on this topic as it seems to be relevant to this time in history more than ever, and in my opinion worthy of open and objective discussion by all critical thinkers everywhere.
Chase: TY for your extended comments. Re your concerns with changing the Beliefs of others, almost everything we do or have can be abused whether it's a car or a toothbrush.
I guess I'm a strange person because I don't want to believe; I want to know! Sadly, I find there are so many areas that I don't know about for certain. I choose not to believe one side or the other in these areas, and am open to receive more information to determine what I KNOW. What I do know is that most people's beliefs are based on quicksand, and often founded upon emotions rather than facts.
Nancy: One of our main challanges is that there are very few 100% certainties in life. In other words, almost everything we think we know, is really a Belief.
> you may decide that it is worth your time to try to fix that person’s misconception…
Bad idea :-) Unless you are in need of new enemies, of course.
People cultivate their beliefs with so much commitment and investment of time, energy, money and sacrifice of relationships. Their beliefs are (usually) more important than being right, feeling pleasure or enjoying happiness. When money is in play, people are ready to sacrifice everybody and everything to clear the way for new streams of income, as we humbly see from the 2019-2024 self-destruction of medical sciences.
Besides, who are you to decide what is right for another person? Besides besides, how do you know that their declared beliefs are their professed and practiced beliefs? Maybe it’s only a trap to vampire energy from you and enjoy Attention UnLtd.?
In short, why would you be interested in what other people believe? That’s their game and their problems. Wouldn’t it be wiser to resolve one’s own dead ends first?
Dan: We are not on the same page about that. Most people create Beliefs with few facts and almost no critical thinking. Take the Belief that wind energy is necessary to save us from a climate catastrophe. That is Scientifically unfounded. If changed in the right way, there will be no enemy.
This is a nice example of a cascade of false statements, not beliefs.
“Climate” - we do not have any idea about it. Whatever scientists write about “climate” is only a hypothesis, because “climate” refers to thousands of years of certain phenomena. Unfortunately, the oldest “climate scientists” (what a funny name) are probably in their eighties, so they do not remember what happened 5,000 years ago and we do not have any recordings from that era.
“Catastrophe” can only refer to an event which has already happened. In our entire history as humankind, we have not seen any catastrophe related to climate. We only talk and write about it. And only within the last 60 years or so - since the time when press, radio and TV made it possible to spread the fake news of “climate” “problems”.
So “climate catastrophe” is a made-up term which means nothing. Literally, nothing.
“Saving” from “climate catastrophe” is another false concept. What does “saving” mean? For people in Novosybirsk, -60C is a daily experience, not any catastrophe. For those in Africa, +50 in daytime and -10 at night is a daily experience, not any catastrophe. It is called “weather” - by the way. Why would anyone be saved from it?
“Wind energy” is only referred to in the context of “capturing” it and using. So the statement that “wind energy” can save us is wrong - and it should be: “wind energy successfully captured from the nature…”
The problem is, what is happening when we “capture” wind energy. We actively change wind paths and the whole wind management worldwide. We don’t know what we are doing. The catastrophe may come from the disturbed wind patterns, resulting in the disturbed temperature distribution and patterns, resulting in the disturbed ocean-to-land temperature, pressure and humidity balance.
Dan: Your diagnosis of an alarmist's climate angst is accurate — but it is a Belief. In effect you are goping about some of what I identified to get that person to change their Belief in impending tragedy, to a more realistic perspective.
It’s all a coffee table talk. You are proposing some frameworks to grasp some meaning of some things, I am trying to find my place within this framework, but both parties only waste time - our theories do not matter in the real world.
Actually, we are losing big time because within these 2 or 3 hours when we rotate the table, people in the real world go through experience. Whether it is good or bad experience, we don’t know, because only time will tell it. Yes, I refuse to use “beliefs” here as evasion tactics.
Experience in the real world is far more important than table talks because it has enormous potential to trigger contextual, deeply rooted transformation - which will never happen through mind talks. For one reason: what the mind can make up, it can protect, justify, make beautiful and worthwhile… until one day real-life experience washes away this sand castle, and then the same mind will make up opposite impressions and opposite views (aka beliefs) in respect of the same thing. What we know from old age mind melting. Or from betrayal in romantic relationships. Or from boredom developing in long-term marriages.
All this said, I appreciate (and sometimes like) attempts at classifying and categorizing our short-lived stay on this Earth. As if it was of any value (other than material to convince some publisher to pay royalties, I guess).
As regards hard beliefs… is there a way to convince / persuade a person with a strong agenda (like the worldwide con trick referring to climate = $$ billions) to give up their actions which cause destruction in the real world?
From reading your articles and others I KNOW that wind energy is inefficient and is more detrimental to the environment that any perceived gain many times over. Basically it's a scam making a lot of money for a few.
I would like to agree with Dan, however this wrong thinking costs all of us tons of money and is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Yes, false beliefs such as in wind energy are costing us more than we as a society can afford to waste. But do the people who believe such woke environmentalist ideas REALLY believe them?
Google the psychological studies on "confirmation bias". They are eye-opening. They prove that a certain percentage of the population will lie to go along with what others believe. We call those people "leftists". The problem with them is: Proving them wrong will not change their minds.
The subconscious mind is where the "shazam" moments are created. Those moments where we get those flashes of insight that's escaped us, often times for years. Thinking about something, often, is a like giving a search command to a computer.
The mind will start to observe, collect, and organize information in some logical fashion on that subject, all without any conscious effort on our part. Then after enough information is gathered it will fill in the blanks and give you the answer. Tesla developed alternating current via just such a "shazam" moment.
The mind is an amazing organ, but it requires "critical" thought processes in order to give the subconscious mind direction, and that starts with reading books.... a lot of them.
Belief is being confused with opinion which latter concept admits of informational limitations and therefor is inherently open to modification as suggested by the discussion.
Sometimes. people have no desire to change, so what do you do? I would just walk away and let them believe exactly, what they want to believe. Some people are not open to learning!
Barbara: most of the time people are resistant to changing their beliefs. One of the points above is that if you apply some Science here, that you can get people to change their Beliefs, both directly and indirectly...
The ice berg analogy in my opinion makes a lot of sense and when I applied this idea to my own belief system and thought about it, I can't think of a better comparison. I have spent a great deal of time academically and personally researching epistemology, the physiological and psychological aspects of forming beliefs, and how we differentiate fact from belief, working and long term memory, subliminal messaging, motivation, and emotion. I am by no means an authority on these topics, but I do hold a degree in psychology/neuroscience. Dan made an observation/question that I see frequently, "In short, why would you be interested in what other people believe? That’s their game and their problems. Wouldn’t it be wiser to resolve one’s own dead ends first?" I believe Dan raises a valid point especially with regard to one's freedom of autonomy in forming their own homogenous understanding of their own belief system. It does not seem noble to try and reshape another persons belief system. This raises a question, if someone develops a belief system shaped by experience and maybe genetics that leads them to experiencing above average levels of stress, depression, perhaps borderline personality disorder, phobia, etc..., would it be unethical to help that person develop beliefs that might help them to understand themselves and the world they interact with? Is there a benefit to assist them to develop a cohesive understanding, self-esteem, self efficacy, and self control? Is it wrong to help them find a belief system where they might feel better accepted and in turn accept a society that is quick to stigmatize a person that present themselves in a way that may seem awkward to others? As for how people form beliefs, it is the subliminal memory that is most vulnerable to intrusive influence and we should try and remember this to protect our minds especially today where we see the intended creation of cognitive dissonance that is encouraging the gradual influence to learned helplessness. When someone feels helpless they are now ripe for conditioning. Should a bad actor be pulling the levers of manipulation pertaining to the beliefs of the completely unaware victim('s) I would argue that this is no less than brain rape. For this reason, I completely understand why Dan seems to believe trying to fix a persons misconception is a bad idea. To lend credibility to this post first it is important to understand that the mainstream tells us subliminal messaging is mildly effective at best. I would argue that if this is the case, why are tools like Project Illicit, a website managed by Harvard that has been employed for public use to determine ones illicit bias in terms of race especially along the lines of microaggressions. This tool utilizes the same memory forming areas of the brain that are used in subliminal memory formation. The ethics involved in subliminal marketing and mind control are a huge public concern; therefore, would it behoove a perpetrator to debunk research like James Vicary in his pop-corn and Coke experiment. Edward Bernays (Sigmund Freud's nephew) worked with the US Government in the 1940's and 50's in utilizing commercial media and specialized media that Bernays says "Knowledge of how to use this enormous amplifying system becomes a matter of primary concern to those who are interested in socially constructive action." There are books on this subject that have mysteriously gone away and forgotten (I think I used to know someone who actually came across some of these books, but maybe they made it up) as well as copious amounts of research that is classified and or withheld which further perpetuates research that relegates subliminal messaging's effectiveness to be minimal or a myth. Neuroscience research with the advent of fMRI and other technologies has discovered certain brain functions like thalamus filtering which demonstrates how information is forwarded to other processing regions of the brain and this is just scratching the surface of what has been learned. Whether you believe what I have shared is accurate will be interpreted by your own experience and beliefs, that is our God given right. So I have a question for Dan, if you suspected a friend or loved one to have formed a belief or system of beliefs that might cause that person stress, self-harm, or harm to others, would you want to try and help that person? John, I thank you for writing on this topic as it seems to be relevant to this time in history more than ever, and in my opinion worthy of open and objective discussion by all critical thinkers everywhere.
Chase: TY for your extended comments. Re your concerns with changing the Beliefs of others, almost everything we do or have can be abused whether it's a car or a toothbrush.
I guess I'm a strange person because I don't want to believe; I want to know! Sadly, I find there are so many areas that I don't know about for certain. I choose not to believe one side or the other in these areas, and am open to receive more information to determine what I KNOW. What I do know is that most people's beliefs are based on quicksand, and often founded upon emotions rather than facts.
Nancy: One of our main challanges is that there are very few 100% certainties in life. In other words, almost everything we think we know, is really a Belief.
> you may decide that it is worth your time to try to fix that person’s misconception…
Bad idea :-) Unless you are in need of new enemies, of course.
People cultivate their beliefs with so much commitment and investment of time, energy, money and sacrifice of relationships. Their beliefs are (usually) more important than being right, feeling pleasure or enjoying happiness. When money is in play, people are ready to sacrifice everybody and everything to clear the way for new streams of income, as we humbly see from the 2019-2024 self-destruction of medical sciences.
Besides, who are you to decide what is right for another person? Besides besides, how do you know that their declared beliefs are their professed and practiced beliefs? Maybe it’s only a trap to vampire energy from you and enjoy Attention UnLtd.?
In short, why would you be interested in what other people believe? That’s their game and their problems. Wouldn’t it be wiser to resolve one’s own dead ends first?
Which is, obviously, yet another belief…
Dan: We are not on the same page about that. Most people create Beliefs with few facts and almost no critical thinking. Take the Belief that wind energy is necessary to save us from a climate catastrophe. That is Scientifically unfounded. If changed in the right way, there will be no enemy.
This is a nice example of a cascade of false statements, not beliefs.
“Climate” - we do not have any idea about it. Whatever scientists write about “climate” is only a hypothesis, because “climate” refers to thousands of years of certain phenomena. Unfortunately, the oldest “climate scientists” (what a funny name) are probably in their eighties, so they do not remember what happened 5,000 years ago and we do not have any recordings from that era.
“Catastrophe” can only refer to an event which has already happened. In our entire history as humankind, we have not seen any catastrophe related to climate. We only talk and write about it. And only within the last 60 years or so - since the time when press, radio and TV made it possible to spread the fake news of “climate” “problems”.
So “climate catastrophe” is a made-up term which means nothing. Literally, nothing.
“Saving” from “climate catastrophe” is another false concept. What does “saving” mean? For people in Novosybirsk, -60C is a daily experience, not any catastrophe. For those in Africa, +50 in daytime and -10 at night is a daily experience, not any catastrophe. It is called “weather” - by the way. Why would anyone be saved from it?
“Wind energy” is only referred to in the context of “capturing” it and using. So the statement that “wind energy” can save us is wrong - and it should be: “wind energy successfully captured from the nature…”
The problem is, what is happening when we “capture” wind energy. We actively change wind paths and the whole wind management worldwide. We don’t know what we are doing. The catastrophe may come from the disturbed wind patterns, resulting in the disturbed temperature distribution and patterns, resulting in the disturbed ocean-to-land temperature, pressure and humidity balance.
WE create the catastrophe.
Quite a belief, I would say.
Dan: Your diagnosis of an alarmist's climate angst is accurate — but it is a Belief. In effect you are goping about some of what I identified to get that person to change their Belief in impending tragedy, to a more realistic perspective.
It’s all a coffee table talk. You are proposing some frameworks to grasp some meaning of some things, I am trying to find my place within this framework, but both parties only waste time - our theories do not matter in the real world.
Actually, we are losing big time because within these 2 or 3 hours when we rotate the table, people in the real world go through experience. Whether it is good or bad experience, we don’t know, because only time will tell it. Yes, I refuse to use “beliefs” here as evasion tactics.
Experience in the real world is far more important than table talks because it has enormous potential to trigger contextual, deeply rooted transformation - which will never happen through mind talks. For one reason: what the mind can make up, it can protect, justify, make beautiful and worthwhile… until one day real-life experience washes away this sand castle, and then the same mind will make up opposite impressions and opposite views (aka beliefs) in respect of the same thing. What we know from old age mind melting. Or from betrayal in romantic relationships. Or from boredom developing in long-term marriages.
All this said, I appreciate (and sometimes like) attempts at classifying and categorizing our short-lived stay on this Earth. As if it was of any value (other than material to convince some publisher to pay royalties, I guess).
As regards hard beliefs… is there a way to convince / persuade a person with a strong agenda (like the worldwide con trick referring to climate = $$ billions) to give up their actions which cause destruction in the real world?
Dan: The ouline of an answer to your last question, is in the commentary.
From reading your articles and others I KNOW that wind energy is inefficient and is more detrimental to the environment that any perceived gain many times over. Basically it's a scam making a lot of money for a few.
I would like to agree with Dan, however this wrong thinking costs all of us tons of money and is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Yes, false beliefs such as in wind energy are costing us more than we as a society can afford to waste. But do the people who believe such woke environmentalist ideas REALLY believe them?
Google the psychological studies on "confirmation bias". They are eye-opening. They prove that a certain percentage of the population will lie to go along with what others believe. We call those people "leftists". The problem with them is: Proving them wrong will not change their minds.
But what else can we do?
RF: What we can do is more sophisticated than simply showing them that they are wrong. It's explained above.
Wow…such an intriguing topic!
This is- ironically speaking- going to give my conscious AND subconscious mind something to really chew on today!
Thx, John!
Amy: Yes, the study of Beliefs is fascinating...
Good article!!!!
The subconscious mind is where the "shazam" moments are created. Those moments where we get those flashes of insight that's escaped us, often times for years. Thinking about something, often, is a like giving a search command to a computer.
The mind will start to observe, collect, and organize information in some logical fashion on that subject, all without any conscious effort on our part. Then after enough information is gathered it will fill in the blanks and give you the answer. Tesla developed alternating current via just such a "shazam" moment.
The mind is an amazing organ, but it requires "critical" thought processes in order to give the subconscious mind direction, and that starts with reading books.... a lot of them.
In today's edition, thanks again,
Rich
Rich: Yes, I should have written about the Critical Thinking connection — so I just added a sentence.
It seems to me that
Belief is being confused with opinion which latter concept admits of informational limitations and therefor is inherently open to modification as suggested by the discussion.
John: EVERYTHING we know has informational limitations...