muso wrote on May 2^nd, 2012 at 6:57pm:

Yes misconception is common, but its not an attempt at self-deception (although it may be a result of laziness.

"The river in Egypt" is a wilful attempt at self-deception.

"my heart tells me yes, but my head tells me no" indicates the thinker is unable to determine the truth - he/she is conflicted and is admitting it.

What's Lady Macbeth's dog got to do with it? 

muso wrote on May 3^rd, 2012 at 7:56am:

But acknowledging that belief, without the possibility of evidence, and truth must always be divided by the greatest abyss of doubt... Conquered only in the mind by a leap of faith...

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 3^rd, 2012 at 8:06am:


Generally, yes, but it's by no means black and white as to what actually constitutes evidence.

For example, if you are convinced that Christianity is meaningful for your life, you may see all kinds of evidence for it, and every time you see some additional evidence, your faith is reinforced. That's how it works. In fact, that's how any learning process works.

I used to talk to an ex-evangelical Christian. He told of how he used to have daily articulated conversations with Jesus Christ. That was more than enough evidence for him to believe, but he started to believe before that stage. Later in life,  he "realised" that he was mistaken, and what he was experiencing was just the result of an overactive mind. 

People generally don't like to share these experiences, but they are very common, and they have a proven neurological basis.  It doesn't mean that they are suffering from a mental condition. On the contrary. Talented authors tell of their characters talking to them as they write. Talented musicians talk about hearing music in their heads before they write it. These are all symptoms of a brain that resonates with health.

Religiosity is another talent. I don't mean by that it's necessarily a truism any more that you must obviously enjoy listening to a talented rap singer. Obviously there are talented people out there who believe in all kinds of conflicting religions. I believe that's it's a kind of intelligence.  Some interpret their religiosity in a traditional religious sense complete with mystical and supernatural factors.  Others interpret it in a purely naturalistic way. Either way, just like the musical analogy, it's a question of taste, and I'll just whip out my usual bit of Latin:

De gustibus non est disputandum

Relligiosity is clearly reflected in brain development, and it's no different to other kinds of intelligence, such as cognitive ability, social intelligence and even motor ability/ athletic ability/dexterity.   In a physiological sense, religious development is identical to other cognitive development in that it involves the development of neural pathways. (Centred on the parietal lobe according to recent research.)

That's what I believe, but I'm quite prepared to  modify that belief, given  additional evidence.

muso wrote on May 3^rd, 2012 at 9:45am:

Yes, its true that many sane (particularly creative) people claim they hear voices (as you say, authors do make that claim about the characters of their novels). However, they would admit that, while they may decide who the voice is, (and why is it always a famous figure they're hearing? ) they know they cannot prove it... Not even to themselves and their choice of speakers has everything to do with self-flattery and self-serving bias.

This point was exactly the one that caused Salaman Rushdie all his grief, when he suggested that Mohammed may have been listening to a demon and not an angel when hearing the Koran. It is a testament to how flimsy the Mohammedan claim is of Koranic divine origin. Of course it can't be proved, but the blind religious can't accept that.

Yadda wrote on May 3^rd, 2012 at 10:55am:


Quote:
Einstein

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 1:33pm:

For the human the whip is the fear of death and doubt.