Subjective belief system vs. set of solid convictions, which is better?

Question

Based on a subjective belief system today's culture propagates the view that "if it works for me, it's right." However, wouldn't you agree that there is a big difference between what seems to work for the moment and what is in fact "right"? For example: What if cheating on an exam meant the difference between passing of failing; would it be ok to cheat because it works for the moment? What if stealing could make life easier and better; would it be ok to steal? What if lying to someone might avert a big argument; would it be ok to lie? For many of this generation and culture the answer would be yes. But will this approach and thought process work in this real "cause and effect world"? How many of you would say that a subjective belief system is in fact more benifical than a set of solid convictions? How many would say that it would be more benificail to live ones' life based on a set of solid convictions? And why do you believe so?

Interested in ALL different beliefs. Please answer honestly and respectfully.

Thank you in advance.

spnkitman- I would beg to differ that there is indeed a set of solid convictions. Although many may not agree with me because their beliefs differ from mine, I would dare to say that my personal set of solid convicitons are based on objective Faith in God that is real, relevent, and right now. So I would say that there is a set of solid convictions. (Based on a persons beliefs.)

Answer 1

A set of solid convictions works for me. I get tired of people telling me "rules are meant to be broken"! What? I don't get it. You see so many doing like you say, "I do what is right in the moment.". That's like all the homicides you see on TV;"I shot my spouse for cheating because I was angry and felt betrayed 'at that moment'." OK. We'll let you go free, then?
Or pleading temporary insanity. Sure, you went insane at the moment you broke the law, but sweetie, you are still GUILTY. No, I think that is a cop-out to doing whatever you want in life, and that cannot work in society today. I think it is well proven.

Answer 2

A subjective belief system is more beneficial to human kind because it allows change, discussion and re-aligning of beliefs. Solid convictions were subjectively created over time, so they may or may not serve any real purpose and were most likely created to solve a current situation in time. In effect, there is not true solid convictions but only subjective beliefs that have existed over time. For example, your cheating on an exam comment is not a solid conviction because exams in the form they exist today did not exist at one time, therefor not cheating on an exam was a subjective conviction at one time.

Answer 3

Both systems are wrong.

A subjective belief system implies no consistency, as one only needs to turn to another system when looking to justify his/her actions.

A set of solid convictions implies stagnation of beliefs in a pre-set system.

They are both obstacles to the process of self-evaluation that allows a person to better themselves according to their personal experiences.

A subjective belief system isn't far from amorality. The person simply "shops" for an inner system of values. But it has such mobility that the person, in an egotistical fashion, will commit actions against the pre-chosen system, then find one to justify what he/she did. Thus avoiding guilt and other self-evaluation processes.

A set of solid convictions does not tolerate self-criticism. A person with set convictions cannot move from the point where it is standing, turning everything into black and white. Set convictions cannot lead to adaptation, making the person incapable of evaluating correctly situations that where not planned in advance by the set of convictions. New events becomes necessarily black, because the person does not posess the ability to process imprevisibility.

In order to learn, adapt and evolve, a person must take the middle-road. A system you could refer to as an "Objective set of convictions": solid basis, but no pre-set attitudes or views. Giving the person the ability to stay true to basic values, while being able to adapt to moral situations he/she had never encountered before. Also, this protects the person's basic value system, making it so that the person does not feel threatened when one of his/her views is "under attack", allowing either to stand your ground or modify your views (maintaining your point of view despite external pressure, or correct a wrong behavior when others point it out).

Answer 4

I need both.

I know very well how we humans can be so 100% sure of something and 100% wrong at the same time.

I do my best to figure out what my subjective beliefs are, but they're contingent on a "solid" belief system: the Church.

A Catholic has centuries of wise, prayerful people's thoughts and writings to use as a map to a closer walk with God and to a more moral/ethical life.

It's benificial to me in that I have a broad, general road map of how to get to where I'm going, but the sidestreets and short cuts and scenic routes are up to me to choose as I feel the Holy Spirit is leading me.

Answer 5

I didn’t read your entire statement because you use the term, “subjective belief system” as if it were some established system recognized by human dynamics.

There is generally two basic types of what passes for reasoning and they are subjective thinking and objective thinking. Both are used by us humans to make decisions. It is a fair thing to say that subjective thinking, by far the most popular, is generally uninformed and self serving and results in belief systems.

Objective thinking requires knowledge and work, two things unpopular with most people.

It is safe to say that objective reasoning results in an observation supported by the majority of supposed healthy, informed individuals; in other words, an assumption with which most normal people would agree.

A ridiculous example for the sake of argument:
Objective: I cannot swim across the Atlantic. Subjective; Jesus could make the swim if he wanted to.

You may have mixed up philosophy or metaphysics with human dynamics; it happens all the time.

Jim D

Answer 6

The "Truth" will always remain the "Truth", it never changes, it is eternal.
A belief system and a set of solid convictions are one in the same.
A human being is the one that must change, must adapt, to find that elusive quality known to man as "Truth".

It is the "conscience" within man that helps determine, through trial and error, what is right or wrong. Experiencing both "Truth" and "Falsehood" allows man to make the right moral choices in life.
Truth and falsehood are not in conflict. It's when both truth and falsehood are within man that conflict comes to the surface.

A human being must root out all the falsehood and that which remains will be the "Truth".

"Faith in God is a prerequisite."

Answer 7

There are no solid convictions only subjective beliefs based on assessment of probability relative to the time and space that the individual is in. In the physical world is better to base actions on this than on vague subjective beliefs.