How do some people scorn some beliefs as "superstition" while accepting as truth things just as absurd.

Question

As an atheist I am so mystified to hear my religious friends sneer or laugh at the doctrines or customs of others, such as wailing walls and burqas and snake handling or speaking in tongues, while they view their own religious customs and beliefs as perfectly logical. They don't believe in Santa Claus, or the Tooth Fairy, but they believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old, or was created in 7 days, or they accept magic in prayers uttered at a special wall, or ritual cannibalism. Can anyone explain how two opposing ideas of “my reality" and “their superstition" live inside one person's head?

Answer 1

Cognitive disonance and cognitive rigidity. Also tribal behaviors that haven't altered much since the stone age.

Answer 2

That's a tough one. i have some VERY unorthodox views, and they sond truly nonsensical. Here's the deal: I am an ecclectic monotheistic witch.

I believe in a single "God," but I cannot define it. I suspect it has something to do with collective consciousness.

I believe that consciousness - which we all understand to be at least partially related to the firing of synapses in the brain - can sometimes effect the physical world. On a very basic and clear level, it allowas us to move our bodies, but I suspect that it goes beyond that by means of some as yet undiscovered quanta.

So while my beliefs sound silly to many, I do not have "supernatural" beliefs. i believe that, should I someday be proven correct, it will be through science. I'm not saying I know I'm right. I could well be way off the mark. But it makes much more sense to me than the "supernatural." I believe that all things that humanity now chalks up to the supernatural will one day be explained by science, be it subatomic particles, some kind of "energy," or mass hallucinations. I believe that there are still many things that we do not yet understand, but I am not prepared to deny that they exist outright.

Answer 3

I am amazed, too. I see people realizing the negatives of a theocracy in the Middle East but yet when I try to apply these examples to why separation of church and state is so important in the U.S., they literally don't see it. The response is along the lines of 'well, but our stuff is true'. No one THINKS. Why? Because these belief systems have been so interwoven into their worldview and identity that to question them means to literally question who they are. And it literally means taking all meaning out of the world which is VERY scary.

Answer 4

There are some subtleties at work, which seem to escape the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filters of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any challenge to one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and an assault upon their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding... a new insight, to be appropriately incorporated into one's world-view However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode, for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down... and ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies, misrepresentations and pseudo-science that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... trying to figure out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded (willing to honestly consider alternative possibilities), intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a conviction that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a venue like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking answers, or new information... these might cause them to QUESTION their beliefs, or might put their beliefs at risk. No... they are closed-minded, seeking only VALIDATION of their beliefs... and hence, of their self-description.

*****************

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion." ~ Robert M. Pirsig

Answer 5

Most of them are to close minded to actually take a step back and look at what they believe to be 'true'. If they were to actually do this...either they would believe more...or like what happens to a lot of people... they realize and think...what the hell was I thinking..I can't believe I actually believed that...I was such a hypocrite

Answer 6

I think the problem is FAITH. Believing in something seems to restrict some people from seeing anything else.

Answer 7

No, sorry. As an atheist, you believe in nothing so you wouldn't believe me anyway.

Answer 8

Admit their faults...what're you crazy?!?!?!

Answer 9

Some athiest want to be related to apes.