Believing something is not an accomplishment...

[89Hen]

I've posted this before but the smartest guy I've ever met had a father who told him at a young age:

"Question everything in life, Norm. Including me".

Norm did and he was brilliant.

The part I think is getting glossed over is that at the end of the day Norm still had beliefs. I get what you're saying that it's good to question, but let's not pretend that there are people without beliefs.

[Chizzang]

I've posted this before but the smartest guy I've ever met had a father who told him at a young age:

"Question everything in life, Norm. Including me".

Norm did and he was brilliant.

The part I think is getting glossed over is that at the end of the day Norm still had beliefs. I get what you're saying that it's good to question, but let's not pretend that there are people without beliefs.

89Hen,
There is obviously no such thing as a human being with no beliefs...
The entire POINT of this is not an exercise on literalism

The point is just as simple as the thread header
"Believing in something is not an accomplishment"
The End...

Anything beyond that is just for emphasis

[89Hen]

The point is just as simple as the thread header
"Believing in something is not an accomplishment"
The End...

Anything beyond that is just for emphasis

So this was for emphasis?

Show me a staunch belief and I'll show you a closed door...

Bullshit. You were definitely implying that a person with staunch beliefs is inferior. I think somebody with no staunch beliefs is a pussy.

[Chizzang]

The point is just as simple as the thread header
"Believing in something is not an accomplishment"
The End...

Anything beyond that is just for emphasis

So this was for emphasis?

Show me a staunch belief and I'll show you a closed door...

Bullshit. You were definitely implying that a person with staunch beliefs is inferior. I think somebody with no staunch beliefs is a pussy.

Its a valid observation... not an indictment
Staunch Beliefs are indeed closed doors - you're proving that right now
You have a staunch belief that Staunch Beliefs are important to have - so does JSO

My only observation of your belief in staunch beliefs is this:
Those Staunch Beliefs are not accomplishments of any significance

"Good Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions" ~ Jerry Falwell

[89Hen]

Its a valid observation... not an indictment
Staunch Beliefs are indeed closed doors - you're proving that right now
You have a staunch belief that Staunch Beliefs are important to have - so does JSO

I do believe staunch beliefs are important to have and that everyone has them. But surely you realize that "staunch" doesn't mean "can never change". At some point you have to come to conclusions on many things, otherwise you're just like a four year old asking "why" to every question.

The great thing is that people can have opposing staunch beliefs. They can change staunch beliefs. They can be in the minority of those holding that belief and still be happy with their decision.

[Chizzang]

Its a valid observation... not an indictment
Staunch Beliefs are indeed closed doors - you're proving that right now
You have a staunch belief that Staunch Beliefs are important to have - so does JSO

I do believe staunch beliefs are important to have and that everyone has them. But surely you realize that "staunch" doesn't mean "can never change". At some point you have to come to conclusions on many things, otherwise you're just like a four year old asking "why" to every question.

The great thing is that people can have opposing staunch beliefs. They can change staunch beliefs. They can be in the minority of those holding that belief and still be happy with their decision.

You haven't ^ said anything here that conflicts with the original post...
I am curious what the circumstances are that change a staunch belief because that part of your post actually made me giggle little...

Example:
I'm 100% in belief of __X___ and nothing can change my mind
two years later after events etc.
I am now 100% in belief of __Y__ and __X__ is wrong

After changing staunch beliefs what does a person learn..?
That the value of said "original" staunch belief was sketchy from the get-go

I stand by my original post and add your above post a confirmation of the meaninglessness of holding staunchly to a bundle of thoughts an idea a belief.... as Not an accomplishment

Thank you and yes I'm open to further questioning...

[kalm]

Maybe 89 is an open minded true believer.

[89Hen]

The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to actual wisdom

honest - ego free

Cleets, you love to make a point and say "I have no ulterior motive." or "That's all I'm saying", but it's clear you always do have an ulterior motive and are trying to say something about your superior wisdom.

[89Hen]

I am curious what the circumstances are that change a staunch belief because that part of your post actually made me giggle little...

The example I gave earlier of capital punishment. I was firmly in the "fry him" believer camp and now I'm not. That doesn't mean I think people that believe in capital punishment are necessarily wrong, I just don't agree wtih that thinking any more. It also doesn't mean I am more wise because I was open to change my position. Life happens. Thinking changes.

[JohnStOnge]

I am curious what the circumstances are that change a staunch belief because that part of your post actually made me giggle little...

The example I gave earlier of capital punishment. I was firmly in the "fry him" believer camp and now I'm not. That doesn't mean I think people that believe in capital punishment are necessarily wrong, I just don't agree wtih that thinking any more. It also doesn't mean I am more wise because I was open to change my position. Life happens. Thinking changes.

I'm the same way with capital punishment. I think the advent of genetic testing has raised serious concerns about the accuracy of our litigation system.

Of course I shouldn't be surprised. I have never really heard a good argument for that cliche about ours being the best judicial system in the world. I've never seen any evidence that that's true. Never seen any evidence to suggest that it is particularly good at arriving upon the proper conclusion.

[SeattleGriz]

Your whole argument is a trap. Your fishing is getting better. Not Hillbilly hand fishing good though.

[Chizzang]

Your whole argument is a trap. Your fishing is getting better. Not Hillbilly hand fishing good though.

I believe firmly that not believing in things too firmly is... wait a second here dammit

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Just an FYI
Beliefs are nothing to be proud of
Believing something is not an accomplishment

We all grew up being schooled that beliefs are something to be proud of
but they’re really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider

Set in stone beliefs are easy...
The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to actual wisdom
The “strength of belief” is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself
As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are
Now you’ve made it a part of your ego - the whole "Who I Am" thing

Show me a staunch belief and I'll show you a closed door...
honest - ego free - scrutiny of ones beliefs should be the starting point



Here is something I believe: John StWrong will HATE this thread...

While I agree with this and so forth I can't get over the yearning to throw you head first through a very thick and heavy belief.

[Chizzang]

Just an FYI
Beliefs are nothing to be proud of
Believing something is not an accomplishment

We all grew up being schooled that beliefs are something to be proud of
but they’re really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider

Set in stone beliefs are easy...
The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to actual wisdom
The “strength of belief” is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself
As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are
Now you’ve made it a part of your ego - the whole "Who I Am" thing

Show me a staunch belief and I'll show you a closed door...
honest - ego free - scrutiny of ones beliefs should be the starting point



Here is something I believe: John StWrong will HATE this thread...

While I agree with this and so forth I can't get over the yearning to throw you head first through a very thick and heavy belief.

I'll be in town for Christmas...
looking forward to seeing you too buddy

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Thumbs up buttercup.

[kalm]

Self righteousness? Who'd a thunk it!

Morality is often associated with religion, but new research reveals that children from religious households are actually less generous than kids from a secular background.

This conclusion comes from a study of over 1000 children from around the world, published in the journal Current Biology. The project was led by Professor Jean Decety, a neuroscientist from the University of Chicago, who didn’t originally aim to compare moral behavior. “I was more interested in whether I would find differences in empathy or sharing depending on the culture,” he says.

While previous research has examined generosity in adults, Decety’s work shows that upbringing shapes morality early in life. This includes altruism – actions that benefit a recipient at a cost to the donor. Children learn religious values and beliefs from their family and community, through rituals like going to church. If religion promotes morality, kids from religious households should have stronger altruistic tendencies.......

The results revealed that secular children shared more stickers. Muslim children appear to be less generous than Christian kids, but this is not statistically significant (labelled ‘ns’ in the bar chart below). All three groups became less altruistic with age, though religious kids had lower generosity, suggesting that longer exposure to religion leads to less altruism........

Compared to the other two groups, Muslims thought harmful actions were meaner and believed in harsher punishment. Christians judged the harm to be meaner than secular kids, though there was no difference in their punitive ratings. This is consistent with fundamentalism, when actions are seen as either right or wrong, with no gradient in morality between two extremes. Overall, religious children are less tolerant of harmful actions and favored harsh penalties.

Parents were also asked to score their children according to a sense of empathy and sensitivity to injustice. This subjective self-reporting showed that religious adults think their children have strong moral tendencies, contradicting objective assessments of altruism (generosity and moral sensitivity).

Why are religious people less moral? One factor is a psychological phenomenon known as ‘moral licensing’: a person will justify doing something bad or immoral – like being racist – because they’ve already done something ‘good’, such as praying. “It’s an unconscious bias,” Decety explains. “They don’t even see that’s not compatible with what they’ve been learning in church.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2 ... -morality/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HI54UNI]

Self righteousness? Who'd a thunk it!

Morality is often associated with religion, but new research reveals that children from religious households are actually less generous than kids from a secular background.

This conclusion comes from a study of over 1000 children from around the world, published in the journal Current Biology. The project was led by Professor Jean Decety, a neuroscientist from the University of Chicago, who didn’t originally aim to compare moral behavior. “I was more interested in whether I would find differences in empathy or sharing depending on the culture,” he says.

While previous research has examined generosity in adults, Decety’s work shows that upbringing shapes morality early in life. This includes altruism – actions that benefit a recipient at a cost to the donor. Children learn religious values and beliefs from their family and community, through rituals like going to church. If religion promotes morality, kids from religious households should have stronger altruistic tendencies.......

The results revealed that secular children shared more stickers. Muslim children appear to be less generous than Christian kids, but this is not statistically significant (labelled ‘ns’ in the bar chart below). All three groups became less altruistic with age, though religious kids had lower generosity, suggesting that longer exposure to religion leads to less altruism........

Compared to the other two groups, Muslims thought harmful actions were meaner and believed in harsher punishment. Christians judged the harm to be meaner than secular kids, though there was no difference in their punitive ratings. This is consistent with fundamentalism, when actions are seen as either right or wrong, with no gradient in morality between two extremes. Overall, religious children are less tolerant of harmful actions and favored harsh penalties.

Parents were also asked to score their children according to a sense of empathy and sensitivity to injustice. This subjective self-reporting showed that religious adults think their children have strong moral tendencies, contradicting objective assessments of altruism (generosity and moral sensitivity).

Why are religious people less moral? One factor is a psychological phenomenon known as ‘moral licensing’: a person will justify doing something bad or immoral – like being racist – because they’ve already done something ‘good’, such as praying. “It’s an unconscious bias,” Decety explains. “They don’t even see that’s not compatible with what they’ve been learning in church.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2 ... -morality/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reminds me of the tree huggers that fly on private jets and then purchase carbon credits to alleviate their guilt.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Self righteousness? Who'd a thunk it!

Morality is often associated with religion, but new research reveals that children from religious households are actually less generous than kids from a secular background.

This conclusion comes from a study of over 1000 children from around the world, published in the journal Current Biology. The project was led by Professor Jean Decety, a neuroscientist from the University of Chicago, who didn’t originally aim to compare moral behavior. “I was more interested in whether I would find differences in empathy or sharing depending on the culture,” he says.

While previous research has examined generosity in adults, Decety’s work shows that upbringing shapes morality early in life. This includes altruism – actions that benefit a recipient at a cost to the donor. Children learn religious values and beliefs from their family and community, through rituals like going to church. If religion promotes morality, kids from religious households should have stronger altruistic tendencies.......

The results revealed that secular children shared more stickers. Muslim children appear to be less generous than Christian kids, but this is not statistically significant (labelled ‘ns’ in the bar chart below). All three groups became less altruistic with age, though religious kids had lower generosity, suggesting that longer exposure to religion leads to less altruism........

Compared to the other two groups, Muslims thought harmful actions were meaner and believed in harsher punishment. Christians judged the harm to be meaner than secular kids, though there was no difference in their punitive ratings. This is consistent with fundamentalism, when actions are seen as either right or wrong, with no gradient in morality between two extremes. Overall, religious children are less tolerant of harmful actions and favored harsh penalties.

Parents were also asked to score their children according to a sense of empathy and sensitivity to injustice. This subjective self-reporting showed that religious adults think their children have strong moral tendencies, contradicting objective assessments of altruism (generosity and moral sensitivity).

Why are religious people less moral? One factor is a psychological phenomenon known as ‘moral licensing’: a person will justify doing something bad or immoral – like being racist – because they’ve already done something ‘good’, such as praying. “It’s an unconscious bias,” Decety explains. “They don’t even see that’s not compatible with what they’ve been learning in church.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2 ... -morality/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oddly enough I was making the reverse of this a point just a few days ago on the thread about MT players on AGS. I know that I've spent a good deal of my life trying to make up for or not do some of the bad shit I did when younger. It provided a lesson.

Hell now that I think about it. I think it is selfish not to make mistakes.

[Grizalltheway]

Self righteousness? Who'd a thunk it!



http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2 ... -morality/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oddly enough I was making the reverse of this a point just a few days ago on the thread about MT players on AGS. I know that I've spent a good deal of my life trying to make up for or not do some of the bad shit I did when younger. It provided a lesson.

Hell now that I think about it. I think it is selfish not to make mistakes.

Once a dick, always a dick.

Dick.