OK so there's this thought process that's been in my head for a while now, but I have trouble explaining it in the way I want. People always argue with it, but it isn't my opinion, it's an observation.
Basically, it's about how people call me arrogant because I always think that what I believe is right.
But this is a ridiculous notion because the term "believe" pretty much means "what you think is right".
I believe I am in my room. Because I think, based on evidence, that I am in my room. I am going to say "I am in my room" because I think I'm right. I believe it, therefore I think it's right.
This means that everyone thinks they are right. It is not possible to believe what you believe is wrong, that's a contradiction, and a really obvious one, too.
I don't think I've explained this very well. If you disagree then it means I haven't because, like I say, it's an observation, not opinion (although I suppose you can disagree with the observation, but I don't think many people understand what I'm trying to get at, they usually just say "no, because what if you lose your faith?" - well then obviously you believe you WERE wrong, you don't continue believing in a God you don't believe exists).
Darn my inarticulacy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
i understand what you're saying, and i agree to an extent, but have you looked at it in terms of concrete and abstract?
there are concrete beliefs, like the fact that you know and believe you're in your room because you can feel and see your room. it's a physical fact. similarly, we're sure 1+1=2, because 1+1+1+1=4=2+2 (and we're not quite living in a 1984 society yet to believe otherwise).
it's probably when you're discussing abstract matters that people may perceive you as somewhat arrogant. generally abstract beliefs, such as religion, are highly based upon opinions formed from experience (or lack of). how can you state these beliefs to be absolutely correct unless you've experienced everything in the world and thus have formed an accurate and fair judgement? it's great to have your own opinions and to stand up for what you believe, but allowing a little leeway for the consideration of other ideas, that you can later incorporate in your own beliefs or completely discard, will make your beliefs and arguments more credible to yourself and others.
you're right that what you believe is "what you think is right", but blindly stating your beliefs in a discussion as "right" will make you appear narrow-minded and ignorant, as beliefs are merely opinions that, when remaining internal, are an absolute truth to the individual, yet when expressed in conversation ought to take into account other 'absolute truths' just to open your eyes to a new, perhaps more ignorant, perhaps more correct, perspective. i think the issue here is about keeping a somewhat open mind and hearing other people out.
COGITO ERGO SUM
Best quote ever (LISA - Saved by the bell)
"I think therefore I am, yet I ask, if I think not, am I not? I think not, don't you think?"
I'm arrogant.
Not because i'm always right, but because even if i was wrong i'd still be awesome.
"what if you believe in something that you know is ethically wrong but you still believe in it because you know in the long wrong it'll do some good. (i dunno whether that makes sense)"
From a utilitarian point of view (greatest good for the greatest number) it's fairly easy to justify all kinds of things that would otherwise seem unethical. If the genocide of one small but useless/burdensome group would greatly improve the life of the majority you might as well wipte the motherfuckers out.
It all depends on what kind of moral map you follow. At the base of it all all morality is an error anyway.
I'm cool because i have ridiculously articulate friends. Yesssss.
Jenni xxxxxxx
Post a Comment