“Don’t stop believin’.
Hold on to the feelin’.” – Journey
“Believe.” – Macy’s
Ours is a culture of belief.
As Journey and Macy’s remind us, belief feels good. And we like what feels good. But what feels good isn’t always good for
us. I think there’s something odd, maybe
even harmful, about the way we valorize belief and the feelings associated with
it.
Of course, these statements need qualification. I’m talking primarily about the United States
and primarily about people’s most deeply held beliefs in areas like politics,
religion, and philosophy rather than more mundane beliefs like, “2+2=4” or
“Santa Fe is the capital of New Mexico.”
The beliefs that Santa Fe is the capital of
New Mexico or that the Earth revolves around the sun probably don’t make people
feel good unless they’re lobbyists who like the Southwestern charm of Santa Fe
or people with a fanatical interest in Copernicus and Galileo.
The Believing Feeling
Macy’s puts up a giant sign that says “Believe” because beliefs in the fun of Santa Claus for kids, the
magic of the holiday season, and so forth make people feel good. And of course people who feel good will spend
more money at Macy’s and tune in to the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. Much the same could be said for many beliefs in
politics, religion, philosophy, science, sports, business, art, music, or any
other area where the tenacity with which people hold beliefs is matched only by
the pervasiveness of disagreement about these beliefs.
In light of Journey’s brilliant discourse on the relation
between believin’ and feelin’, let’s call this the believing feeling.
The Right to Believe and the Rightness of Belief
I’m not denying that you have a right to your beliefs. But that doesn’t mean your beliefs are right
or that others don’t have the right to scrutinize them. As John Stuart Mill argued, freedom of belief
is important precisely because it allows us to engage in rational debate that
might allow the better arguments to emerge, maybe even the truth!
Does this mean we’re likely to find the truth? Here’s where I, like my favorite ancient skeptics, have my doubts, especially when it comes to three areas that often
produce the believing feeling: philosophy, religion, and politics.
Philosophers Don't Stop Believin'
As I’ve discussed before, philosophy doesn’t give a lot of firm
answers (although it’s useful in other ways, such as making people less
dogmatically attached to their beliefs!).
This, however, doesn’t stop people from committing to some
philosophical view, often quite adamantly.
The longer I do philosophy the more confused I become that people have
firm beliefs in an area that almost seems to be specifically designed to resist
firm beliefs.
I love arguing as much as
any philosopher, but at the end of the day I suspect that I have as much chance
of being wrong as everyone else (I half-jokingly thought of putting a footnote
at the end of my dissertation that said, “Or maybe not.”). Still, the feeling of being right and
defending one’s views is just too good to give up. Some social scientists have even argued that
reasoning evolved to help us win arguments rather than to seek the truth.
Religion is a big and amorphous thing that resists easy
encapsulation, so I’m not making any claims about religion as a whole. In 21st century America, however,
there’s a popular idea that faith is a desirable thing even (especially?) when
it’s in the absence of any reasons or arguments. This view is a kind of fideism (literally,“faith-ism”). The popularity of fideism
is the product of America’s and Europe’s relatively recent religious history – you
find little fideism among the religious philosophers of, say, classical India
or medieval Europe (they tended to think their religious views were supported
by reasons). Today’s breezy fideism confuses
me, because I tend to think the proper response to a lack of evidence is to
withhold belief. But, again, maybe belief
just feels too good to give up.
Lest readers think I’m declaring myself immune to the
believing feeling, let’s turn to politics.
I find it easier to suspend belief in philosophy and religion than I do
in politics. I taught critical thinking courses
for many years, and I felt that using my authority as a teacher to make
political claims ran contrary to my goal of promoting independent critical
thinking (I still feel this way, although nowadays I teach fewer political
controversies). So, I adopted a policy
of classroom neutrality, which affected my own political thinking.
For instance, while teaching logical fallacies, I noticed that
politicians I agree with use fallacious reasoning about as often as politicians I
dislike. This doesn’t make my side wrong
(that would be the fallacy fallacy!), but I’ve lost my taste for using the word
“rational” as a synonym for “agrees with me." Even more troubling, sometimes
people I disagree with say things that I can’t immediately discount as wrong! I still have political beliefs and I still
act on them, but I’ve come to realize that I could be wrong – although I think I’m less likely to be wrong than my opponents!
People are Strange
But isn’t this all a little odd? After all, if beliefs are supposed to be
about what you think is true given available reasons and evidence, then why would
belief make us feel good? And is the
believing feeling good for us? Does it
make us better people, intellectually and morally?
No comments:
Post a Comment