Finding something to believe in

Do we go through phases of looking of finding something to believe in, or is it something we always do?

(Honest question, and something I'd been thinking about for a bit recently; though this is probably not the best premise for a thread)

Nah, it's a good thread. I'm unsure what I believe in myself, and wonder how people usually go about finding something good for them.

I'd say it's probably cycles. You get desperate, search, get pissed, give up, et cetera.

edited 9th Feb '11 7:25:31 PM by Diamonnes

I've done a lot of searching for something to believe in, only to find that everything seems less concrete and defined than it initially appears.

I think it's natural, though I do wonder if the extent of my own need for something like that is abnormal.

I'd say phases.

Actually, if you find something, if only temporarily, does that count as a phase?

For me, the question is never far away. Probably gets asked at least a few times a week, but I've got a few good answers I'm sticking with for now.

Took me forever to figure out that I could just pick whatever I wanted, though-knowing that is a good start.

Existentialism?

I've never liked that idea, though, myself.

Well, it seems almost tautologically true to me. You have a choice to believe or not believe anything (or at least, to you it seems that way. We act as though we have free will, because if we don't the question is irrelevant.) Therefore, you choose what you believe.

edited 9th Feb '11 8:32:56 PM by deathjavu

Eh, I suppose. To me, though, I guess it never seems like there's really more than one choice. You can either choose whatever viewpoint makes the most sense to you, or you're just guilty of wishful thinking, which would feel like lying to myself.

I don't think this applies to subjective opinions, obviously, just beliefs in general.

edited 9th Feb '11 8:38:43 PM by BobbyG

But what beliefs aren't subjective opinions?

None of them, but in my subjective opinion, empiricism is the most effective way for me to form a reliable understanding of my surroundings, since that's demonstrated pretty good predictive power so far.

I was referring more to stuff like values, morality, that kind of thing.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You start with some base values and morals, and then you are not free to choose things on top of those if they conflict.

But, you can also choose these base values and morals you build off of.

since that's demonstrated pretty good predictive power so far

Shit.

This is empiricist.

I'm caught in an endless empirical feedback loop.

But nah, I don't think science really counts as something to believe in, since it can only really tell us what we don't know, not what we do.

And without derailing into the whole question of free will, I don't think I got to choose my values, since those are the only things I can make choices based on.

edited 9th Feb '11 9:11:07 PM by BobbyG

most effective way for me to form a reliable understanding of my surroundings

If you're starting with this as your end goal, then empiricism seems like a pretty logical "belief" to hold.

Yeah, it is sort of a "belief" that the scientific process "works". A belief supported by all the sweet stuff around you; of particular note would be the computer you're using right now.

I guess scientific belief is just believing that, if something can be demonstrably repeated under certain circumstances, it will happen again under similar circumstances?

Which is still a "belief". Just an incredibly widely held one.

edited 9th Feb '11 9:15:48 PM by deathjavu

I suppose.

What do we mean by "something to believe in", anyway? Because there's a difference, I think, between simply believing that something exists and really, truly believing in it.

Go with science.

Brb, masturbating to The God Delusion and crying myself to sleep

Meh. Speaking as someone who very nearly has a degree in physics, science is a very nice tool, but it won't get you the kind of answers this thread is talking about.

That's what I was thinking.

I've done a lot of searching for something to believe in, only to find that everything seems less concrete and defined than it initially appears.

That, and the only really well defined ones are written by paranoid schizophrenics.

If by something you believe in, you mean a cause to be totally devoted to? Then I would say no. Never have.

Closest thing would be duty and justice. Duty being that where my occupation is concerned, my word is my bond and I will never betray my oath, and justice meaning that I will punish people who sorely deserve it as much as possible in my role as a cop, and do everything I can to assist and defend innocents who are being victimized within the sphere of what I can influence as part of my office.

Those seem like actual goals, but they are pretty vague in reality. "Do your job the way you are supposed to." has lots of room for interpretation, which is probably why I have such goals.

Oh, was there more than "something you should believe in"?

Two things:

One @Bobby: It's possible to acquire new fundamental values/morals over time, and have these conflict with your old ones. Or even to acquire a belief independent of any values/morals, and have this conflict with them. Hell, even simple things like basic instinct and physiological needs could conflict with your beliefs in say, asceticism, or even deeper values of never harming life (which of course requires you to kill yourself asap).

For example, I acquired/manufactured the belief that I should question all my beliefs, including that one. Because most of the terrible things done throughout history were done by those who were convinced they were right. But I also question this questioning because it's not really a practical way to live, at some point you have to make decisions. It's a balancing act, really.

And secondly, I'd say looking for one key thing to believe in is kind of overlooking the complexity of the brain. As far as we know, it's not a monolith, it's a huge mishmash of overlapping, conflicting signals from different parts of the brain. It can't be coordinated towards one key thing in the midst of such complexity.

edited 10th Feb '11 5:37:17 PM by deathjavu

For example, I acquired/manufactured the belief that I should question all my beliefs, including that one. Because most of the terrible things done throughout history were done by those who were convinced they were right.

I see your point in this and I've done this as well, but it seems to me to be an odd case of Hitler Ate Sugar in that because bad people were convinced about their beliefs, no one else should be.