Rational vs. Irrational Beliefs

[SchrodingersDog]

A rational belief is one in which the basis for it can by viewed dispassionately and the SAME conclusion could be reached based SOLEY on the data. In this case an expert may be needed to show the methodology by which such a belief was arrived at, but the charisma of the expert has no real importance.

An irrational belief has no verifiable base and the facts do not lead an objective observer to anywhere near the same conclusion. When you hear double-speak or "special logic" such as "God made the fossils look old to test us", know that you are in irrational territory. Experts in this arena have no such methodology and we must take their word for the story. Whether or not we accept the story or belief is based mostly on personal charisma and /or social acceptance factors.

There is also non-rational, which is distinct from both of the former categories. The majority of human behavior is non-rational.

 

[Stumps]

my rational belief is that you are being irrational!

 

[SchrodingersDog]

There is no such thing as objective data and furthermore nothing can ever be proven absolutely because you would first have to prove the basis for this, reality, and then you would have to prove consciousness which is the basis of experiencing reality. Prove you aren't a brain in a jar.

Some beliefs are rational or irrational based on logic, or our conventional view of things. But there is no absolute way of knowing if you are right or not. And life as we experience it is only really significant in the symbolic sense so it really doesn't matter.

A serious flaw with scientific methodology is that operates only on a intellectual or conceptual level. It does not take into consideration experience at all, and experience is the basis of all understanding. It is certainly possible to transcend intellectual realities and experience others that are not quantifiable or even understandable by intellectual science. If I experience God directly, what rational explantion can factually disprove this, and thus take precedences? If direct experience is the most significant way that I know things, and science cannot disprove what I experience, why should I be wrong?

 

[Stumps]

man you think too much!

 

[SchrodingersDog]

Originally posted by: Stumps
my rational belief is that you are being irrational!

Is that a Dr. McCoy quote?

 

[Klandestine]

i think you are making too much sense for 3:50 in the morning...

 

[quakefiend420]

Originally posted by: SchrodingersDog
There is no such thing as objective data and furthermore nothing can ever be proven absolutely because you would first have to prove the basis for this, reality, and then you would have to prove consciousness which is the basis of experiencing reality. Prove you aren't a brain in a jar.

Some beliefs are rational or irrational based on logic, or our conventional view of things. But there is no absolute way of knowing if you are right or not. And life as we experience it is only really significant in the symbolic sense so it really doesn't matter.

A serious flaw with scientific methodology is that operates only on a intellectual or conceptual level. It does not take into consideration experience at all, and experience is the basis of all understanding. It is certainly possible to transcend intellectual realities and experience others that are not quantifiable or even understandable by intellectual science. If I experience God directly, what rational explantion can factually disprove this, and thus take precedences? If direct experience is the most significant way that I know things, and science cannot disprove what I experience, why should I be wrong?

where are you pasting from?


3

 

[IGBT]

...lets go back 600 years..now..the world is flat..ok??

 

[Stumps]

baw hahahaha beat me to it!

 

[SchrodingersDog]

I started a thread on suicide that's going nowhere so I thought I'd start over with my brainstorm instead of staying in that thread.

 

[Siddhartha]

I keep locking up on beliefs. Are beliefs really rational? When I have probed someone on their belifs I have found that they are no based on a rational thought processes.

 

[SchrodingersDog]

That's because "rational' is the tough part to find. Defined as "having its source in or being guided by the intellect (distinguished from experience or emotion)", rational thought is very rarely encountered.