Tonight a friend and I breifly discussed cognative dissonance in its relation to core values.
The friend usedto post at ILP but he’s now busy with work and stuff.
We chat though, rarely but i like the chats.
When the mind becomes dependant upon something, or believes we need something
in order to live, or something that our friends need in order to live, that belief then
aligns itself with defense mechanisms, which causes the mind to ignore, reject,
rationalize, or in a sophism, get rid of the ideas that are contrary to the survival
associated ideas.
In short, Life before Truth.
Truth is treated as a utility, and it is changed when we assimilate it, usually.
If a person believes they will go to hell if they disobey the religion,
and that they will go to heaven if faithful,
they will form defense mechanisms associated with their religion.
Sure, though this is not isolated. Beliefs that feel bad, seem strange or unsupported can also call for challenges, can drag attention toward them. Some people do not seem to experience the latter, but actually I think most do. I think that is what brings people to internet discussions. It is relief to have other people play the roles of our own doubts, so we can have moments where it seems like we just have one belief (on this or that issue). The theists, for example, can feel as if they are pure believers and the atheists can feel like there are purely rational. (likewise other team battles)
I think this is addictive.
Which is a good choice I would say, unless this is a false dilemma.
Sure, though take religion in its broadest sense, whatever the apriori and ‘oh, it cannot be’ s happen to be.