Monday, May 30, 2011

Why weird people believe Michael Shermer

Michael Shermer has published a new book–his “magnum opus.”


We form our beliefs for a variety of subjective, personal, emotional, and psychological reasons in the context of environments created by family, friends, colleagues, culture, and society at large; after forming our beliefs we then defend, justify, and rationalize them with a host of intellectual reasons, cogent arguments, and rational explanations. Beliefs come first, explanations for beliefs follow.
We can’t help believing. Our brains evolved to connect the dots of our world into meaningful patterns that explain why things happen. These meaningful patterns become beliefs. Once beliefs are formed the brain begins to look for and find confirmatory evidence in support of those beliefs, which adds an emotional boost of further confidence in the beliefs and thereby accelerates the process of reinforcing them, and round and round the process goes in a positive feedback loop of belief confirmation. Dr. Shermer outlines the numerous cognitive tools our brains engage to reinforce our beliefs as truths and to insure that we are always right.
In the end, all of us are trying to make sense of the world, and nature has gifted us with a double-edge sword that cuts for and against. On one edge, our brains are the most complex and sophisticated information processing machines in the universe, capable of understanding not only the universe itself but of understanding the process of understanding. On the other edge, by the very same process of forming beliefs about the universe and ourselves, we are also more capable than any other species of self-deception and illusion, of fooling ourselves while we are trying to avoid being fooled by nature.


There’s only one nagging problem: If you take his thesis seriously, then you can’t take his thesis seriously. It’s like reading a book on psychology by a psychotic.

What if mother nature fooled Shermer into believing he outfooled mother nature? What if he’s trapped in a self-delusional feedback loop? What if the blind watchmaker evolved his brain to connect nonexistent dots? What if his brain is his own worst enemy? 

13 comments:

  1. This is why Descartes cheated and snuck God back into the loop!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Except this doesn't offer much, if anything, to explain why so many former enemies of the One true and living God bow the knee to His Christ.

    Although I'm not attempting to set up a straw-man, it's undeniable that anti-theists will often point to "upbringing in a religious environment" as if that summarily explains why so many Arabs are Muslim, so many Indians are Sikhs, so many Japanese are Buddhist, so many Americans are Christian, etc. And while this argument isn't without some merit as far as it goes in that many people naturally tend to ape and parrot whatever cultural milieu in which they find themselves; nevertheless this observation doesn't begin to account for why former Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, atheists, and cultural "Christians" so-called come to faith in the Christ of Scripture and come to embrace an entire comprehensive worldview (Christian theism) that is at every point antithetical to their former worldviews.

    I realize the same argument could also be made for "Christian" de-conversions to atheism, converts to Islam, etc., but again this still seems to cut against the author's seeming assertion about the nature of beliefs, not to mention that obvious weakness that Steve pointed out in the original post - to wit how can Shermer be sure that his beliefs on the topic of belief are anything but "self-deception and illusion, of fooling [himself] while [he is] trying to avoid being fooled by nature"?

    Rich irony there.

    In Him,
    CD

    ReplyDelete
  3. Holy jihad, nagman, my mind is a terrorist.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Poor clueless Coram Deo.
    The evidence is right there in your paragraph, re the transitory nature of the to and fro conversion/deconversion process. And you still are in denial by obliquely characterizing Shermer's self-illusory take on belief. Amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Steve
    Your commentary here has the smear of idiocy and a good deal of pious spite and and holy ire. You knew the christian faery-tale had to end soon.

    Cheers

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh please let Paplinton's comments stick around. I would love to see if he has progressed any from sounding like a mouthpiece for Dawkins.

    Miss your sermons over at Dangerous Idea.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "You knew the christian faery-tale had to end soon."

    Love your optimism Paps!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Poor clueless Coram Deo.
    The evidence is right there in your paragraph, re the transitory nature of the to and fro conversion/deconversion process. And you still are in denial by obliquely characterizing Shermer's self-illusory take on belief. Amazing.


    By Shermer's own lights I have no reason to believe that his (or your) beliefs about my beliefs have any meaning outside of his (or your) own private mind, so why should I care what either of you think?

    In Christ,
    CD

    ReplyDelete
  9. Howdy, Papalinton!

    Why are your comments always so sullen and sour, as if you're sucking on a lemon?

    Do you have kangaroos loose in the top paddock again, mate?

    Or is it more emotional - are you feeling bitter, like a jilted lover, because even the otherwise egocentric John Loftus rejected you as his groupie?

    Anyway, please lighten up and try not to be such a grouch!

    After all, each passing day brings you ever nearer to the grave, which you believe spells The End of Papalinton. So why spend your time commenting on weblogs like ours or Reppert's or Debunking Christianity or the other ones you drive-by comment on? Get out and see the world while you still can! Before it's too late for you!

    Don't forget to pack the Maalox though. It might help with your grumpiness too if the source is colonic or otherwise bowel-related. Or you might try an enema. Or manual disimpaction.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Papalinton has a blog but no posts. Pity. Perhaps he should consider collecting his litter there.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "By Shermer's own lights I have no reason to believe that his (or your) beliefs about my beliefs have any meaning outside of his (or your) own private mind, so why should I care what either of you think?"

    The crux of the problem! Well said Coram Deo.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The most recent White Horse Inn features an interview with Greg Koukl. Koukl and Horton respond to a previous week's interview with Michael Sermer. Click here to listen.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I didn't get 30 seconds into reading the quote before thinking, "Self refuting, self refuting . . ."

    ReplyDelete