Re: Cognitive Dissonance--What Would You Do?

[edarlitrix]

In the moral theology section, I posted a thread titled the same as this one except for the Re:

You can find it here for background info:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=819410

Some persons basically asked me why I have doubts about Christianity or why I would consider abandoning it.

Here are the reasons:

Religious language (talking about “God,” “souls,” “morality,” “atonement,” etc.) can’t be reduced to anything understandable in relation to something else. Those three things especially have their own “nature” that can’t be reduced (at least with language) to something tangible. However, if you simply say these are constructs of the mind infused with emotional content and referring to no thing that actually exists, then the problem is resolved.

Another difficulty I have is that so many philosophers and whatnot argue about every little thing including the big things, like God etc. And yet how are we going to arrive at any truth about the world through philosophy when every time you come up with an argument, somebody jumps up and refutes it and concocts his own argument for the opposite case… and so God surely could not expect us to believe in him based on impartially considering all arguments. Yet, what reason do I have to believe in one God rather than the other? You can try and use apologetics, but there is are rispostes and counter-rispostes to plow and sift through… getting you nowhere. I don’t even have time! It makes me want to scream with Pascal:

“It is good to be tired and wearied by the futile search after the true good *, that we may stretch out our arms to the Redeemer” (not sure which pensée this is).

The only problem with that above quote is that you could substitute whatever you please in for Redeemer… like suicide, Allah, Krishna, videogames, etc.

And so I feel paralyzed intellectually and emotionally!

Any thoughts?*

 

[opus101]

Prayer.

Tell God exactly what you told us. He Himself will lead you to the truth on these matters.

There are too many voices in this world. There is only One Voice that is True, Good and Beautiful.

While being infinitely transcendent, He is also infinitely imminent…closer to us than we are to ourselves. He is simplicity itself.

You’re right, there are tons of philosophies, religions, voices…completely overwhelming! That is why Christ set the Church up as He did. There is one Jesus Christ, one Vicar of Christ on earth, one Church.
Our Lord doesn’t expect us to wade through all of the zillion bits of information and try to determine by ourselves that which is true or not.

But if we start with revelation, we can meditate on how it is true for our whole lives and never plumb its depths. Why bother with anything else, except in relation to the Truths that God has revealed.

 

[slippy]

Hi, nice post, I’m with you. It’s futile to try and convince yourself of something so unconvincing. A lack of any coherent argument in favour of an individual or multiple diety leads to the conclusion that there simply isn’t one/any. Unless you are indoctrinated from an early age or your mind is so fragile as to need a comfort blanket, the default position is none believer.

Enjoy life and be good to yourself and others where you can.

Chris

 

[opus101]

There are many, many people throughout the ages who were definitely not “indocrinated from an early age”, and have embraced the faith totally. Slippy, I challenge you to try prayer as well…even if you don’t believe, give it a shot. You have nothing to lose.

 

[slippy]

Try prayer, nice one. Nothing to lose apart from time. Do you mean quite reflection? I can at least see a benefit to this and there are some studies proving this. If you mean talking to an invisible friend, not so much.

As I said in my post, from youth or a fragile mind looking for blanki.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

Hi, just two quick thoughts for the moment:

The fact that philosophers argue does demonstrate that a purely natural approach (that is, using reason only, not taking things as revealed) to finding the truth of things is both difficult and limited. I tend to think that St. Thomas Aquinas laid it out pretty well, but there are those who disagree. But I think it is worth examining this more closely.

The idea is that God transcends the natural. So within the assumptions of Christianity, it makes sense that natural reason alone would have a hard time grasping who He is fully. It might get a few things, because nature was created by God, but it’s not likely to get everything. And this makes sense.

But, considering nothing else, this seems to leave us in the situation where the truth is not totally accessible, which seems to fly in the face of an idea of a God who is Truth Himself, and who cares about us. This situation where the truth cannot be known seems to be problematic. But if God did exist, how would He solve this problem? By giving us means to know Him that go beyond natural reason alone, by giving us some sort of revelation.

You could say that lots of people interpret revelation differently too, which seems to imply that it’s not clear and doesn’t solve the problem. That is in large part why I am Catholic - it seems like if God wished to make the Truth accessible to us, then He would not only leave a set of writings, but a Church that is capable of saying what they mean.

So I think there is something here to think about, but I think Christianity (particularly Catholicism) does answer the question.

Of course, you could say that so does just saying it’s all fake, which brings me to my next thought (and a half, really).

Religious language (talking about “God,” “souls,” “morality,” “atonement,” etc.) can’t be reduced to anything understandable in relation to something else. Those three things especially have their own “nature” that can’t be reduced (at least with language) to something tangible. However, if you simply say these are constructs of the mind infused with emotional content and referring to no thing that actually exists, then the problem is resolved.

The half thought: the fact that God etc. cannot be reduced to tangible things is not a logical problem, so in some sense this isn’t actually something to be solved.

The Second thought: But it is nevertheless true that this (the idea of God and Truth and meaning and all that) can be thought of as making things more complicated than they need to be. I would disagree somewhat: an overarching meaning to existence (which requires God) does not to me appear to be a superfluous addition.

But I think it’s worth examining this reduction by which we eliminate the supernatural because we can’t grasp it. This is a sort of narrowing in of reality, of taking things that are hard to grasp or can’t be fully conceptualized, and scratching them out. Not only is there no particular reason to do this, but if we do do it is worth noting where the process naturally leads, what happens if we do this again and again.

For example: I may deny the supernatural because I cannot fully perceive it. But then, I cannot fully perceive outer space either, and so I may deny its existence. There are people who do this, and their view of things is still consistent, if less rich (and, I think we’d agree, false). Or I may decide that it is easier too to deny the existence of anything beyond my room and eventually, beyond myself because really, what is this concept of “other things” and “other people”? And there are people who do that too, and they are considered insane - despite the fact that their view, that they are the only real people and that everything else is just made up, is logically consistent.

So I think you could argue that it may be possible to start narrowing the universe more and more inwards so that the things we have trouble explaining no longer need to be explained. We may even be able to do so while making a logically consistent model in our heads. But it is important to remember that doing this process without a positive reason for doing so ultimately leads to the person in the insane asylum who thinks no one but he exists. It is not a process that justifies itself - it should not be done just because it can be done.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . I feel paralyzed intellectually and emotionally!

Any thoughts?

I would take this as God’s response to the manner in which you are approaching Him. He is Beauty and Love: it is in these that I feel closer to Him than in the realm of ideas.

It could also be a test of faith; do you believe in spite of the fact that these apparent contradictions leave you in a muddle?

I would concur with others suggesting prayer. Good works are extremely important.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I would take this as God’s response to the manner in which you are approaching Him. He is Beauty and Love: it is in these that I feel closer to Him than in the realm of ideas.

It could also be a test of faith; do you believe in spite of the fact that these apparent contradictions leave you in a muddle?

I would concur with others suggesting prayer. Good works are extremely important.

This is a very good suggestion, but I do want to point out that not all people approach God in the same way. Prayer can only help (and almost certainly will help), but while God is Beauty and Love, He is also Truth - and some of us are more drawn to the ideas part because of this.

But again, Aloysium’s and others’ suggestion to pray about it is definitely good, but if you find that that alone is not enough, that does not mean that God, should He exist, is ignoring you. I say this only because I had a similar period of doubt a couple years back, and for me it was working through the ideas that ended up helping. Some of us are more idea focused than others.

 

[SteveGC]

Hi, nice post, I’m with you. It’s futile to try and convince yourself of something so unconvincing.

This suggests you want to believe, and your present lack of convincing arguments does nothing more really than reveal an underlying natural inclination you have that we all have, and that is to seek your Creator.

A lack of any coherent argument in favour of an individual or multiple diety leads to the conclusion that there simply isn’t one/any.

Actually it really only leads to the conclusion that you’ve yet to discover the coherent argument, nothing more. I would imagine that’s why you’re here, still seeking (and that’s a good thing)

Unless you are indoctrinated from an early age or your mind is so fragile as to need a comfort blanket, the default position is none believer.

Just a tad insulting to believers. Just a tad.

Enjoy life and be good to yourself and others where you can.

Do you ever ponder why you possess a desire to be good to others?