Good article. I suggest everyone read Michael Shermer's book Why People Believe Weird Things. Shermer is a well-respected skeptic author, and he's very easy to read. He does a monthly column in Scientific American as well.
I'd also recommend Why people Believe Weird Things. Really fascinating stuff.
okay, sorry, let's take a step back: > I believe, Hope is the purpose. Anyone at that level (speaking of Q) certainly doesn't need any research we give them, they already have it all.
So, by this you mean a hypothetical 'Q entity' that has some high level military intelligence possition wouldn't need info from the citezenry? But asking them for it, is a service to them to provide them hope?
But maybe there is really no Q, just the internet ghost that's been constructed on the various chans and here and taken on some life of its own or propigated by folks that maybe believe in the Hope mission or for other nefarious reasons?
Feel free to cut this off anytime, I'm really fascinated by this stuff though. But more in a Why do people believe weird things kind of way. Which I know may be insulting to you.
This is a good book on the topic: https://www.amazon.ca/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
A very, very small minority of people are vegetarian for legitimate health reasons (lysinuric protein intolerance, etc.)
The rest either believe it is better for their health, which is not true, or that animals are intrinsically the intellectual or spiritual equivalent of humans, which is also not true
Some believe that being vegetarian will save the world, and while there's an argument to be made there, it's a pretty poor one and it seems more likely that their diet has more to do with narcissism than altruism
Vegetarians tend to also believe in other related new age naturalism, vitalism, pseudoscience type beliefs (acupuncture, spiritual energy, healing crystals, reincarnation, homeopathy, etc.)
"Why People Believe Weird Things" by Matt Shermer. A hundred or so pages that boils down to "Because they want to." And the more educated a person is, the harder they dig in - mostly because they are used to an environment of defending ideas.
Smart people can believe weird things.
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
Smart people are vulnerable to certain biases and mental traps. And because they are smart they are really good at defending their thinking.
Have you read Michael Shermer's book "Why People Believe Weird Things." He discusses this topic and others like it at great length. Such as 9/11, Bigfoot, Alien abduction and many more. He cites sources, explains exactly why these conspiracies exist, and even gives their arguments some extra validity (steel-manning rather than straw manning) before explaining the reality of the situation.
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
It sounds like you would enjoy Michael Shermer's book, <em>Why People Believe Weird Things</em>.
People of all backgrounds can believe in weird and irrational things. Humans are fallible, our senses can be deceptive. I can only suggest you spend more time around people who disagree with you because you sound very partisan.
Because we evolved to reproduce. We didn't evolve to easily understand reality as it really is.
Michael Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things goes into a lot more detail.
...Extreme skepticism. which is a fairly poor way to live and to think, though it appeals to some people to think they have access to 'the real truth.'
It's worth reading Michael Schermer's Why People Believe Weird Things.
I oppose people who believe factually, demonstrably untrue things, who typically take action based on those wrong beliefs. I and others enjoy learning about mythology and why people believe crazy things.
Why are you here?
Two things.
Ordering tons of stuff to keep yourself in the MLM is called being Garage Qualified.
There is a book called Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time, by Michael Shermer. He makes the point that people involved in conspiracies, cults, etc., aren't stupid. They aren't usually poorly educated. It is an interesting read, and your library probably has a copy.
I read it years ago, and it has kept me humble - none of us are above being sucked in by dangerous beliefs or people.
Why People Believe Weird Things by Michael Shermer, while not specifically about the coC or Christianity, is a great read on, well, exactly what it says.
Michael Shermer was also on an episode of Mr. Deity some years ago and made some interesting points on skepticism and faith. edit: And honestly, go look through the Mr. Deity Youtube channel. It's an interesting, often satirical look at organized religion and the dumb things people do in the name of religion, featuring: Mr Deity (god), Jesus, Lucy (satan), and Larry (god's PA).
Motivated reasoning plays a strong role in why people persist in believing in bad ideas, even well after they should've discarded them. And faith itself is a powerful amplifier of motivated reasoning. If you already believe in an idea; and the entire idea of faith is to get people to believe in certain ideas strongly; every thought you have about that idea is filtered through layers of motivation and complexes of belief about the world.
When inside a system of beliefs, you see the world very differently than when outside it. That's the entire purpose of systems of belief.
There's a decent book that covers this sort of topic in detail; from people believing in scams, cults, pseudo-science, to holocaust deniers. Why People Believe Weird Things, by Michael Shermer. One insight I pulled from the book is: smart people aren't necessarily less likely to believe in false ideas, or to divest themself of bad beliefs. Smart people are more capable, after all, of coming up with intelligent-sounding reasons to believe in bad ideas. So it's really important to learn skills to test your ideas, and to find trustworthy sources for your information.
The most intelligent of us are more capable of justifying their ‘mistakes’ and fortifying their positions, regardless of rational.
This is a good book about such humans.
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
Damned if I know.
Though, I'm told I'm damned...yet I still don't know.
http://amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
Why People Believe Weird Things is more to-the-point and thorough about debunking ( https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893 ).
Nobody sells science as an ideal the way Sagan does. Watching Cosmos was formative for me.
Why People Believe Weird Things by Michael Shermer
I was thinking, wow, those are some very old examples! But then good ole WikiTextBot informed the book was first published in 1841. I’m a history nerd. I’ll check it out!
I recommend Michael Shermer’s Why Smart People Believe Weird Things. (I’m positive the original tile said dumb things or stupid things.) And Will Storr’s The Unpersuadables: Adventures With the Enemies of Science. And Jon Ronson’s Them: Adventures With Extremists.
They are all books that help us try to understand what makes people believe and cling to weird shit. And what makes them mistrust the government - though the DS wasn’t a buzzword, there’s still parallels, of course, and interesting discussion. The Qult is too creepy to ignore and I hope someone is investigating it thoroughly.
Not a doc, but relevant:
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
For more on Basic Skepticism see:
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893
Not necessarily. Being educated doesn't mean you're not indoctrinated by nonsense, or possess critical thinking skills. Educated people are quite capable of believing in nonsense. I think it's more complicated than just education - it's when and how you educate the person, who they are surrounded by, what culture they grew up in, etc.
There's a great book called "Why People Believe Weird Things" that addresses the issue. My favorite book on the subject of belief is probably "How We Know What Isn't So". If you're interested in epistemology, or how beliefs are shaped, these two books give interesting insight.
Relevant Micheal Shermer article and book
Awesome, it's great you're so proud of her!
Haha knowledge that leads to everlasting boredom! Book studies were the worst, I always felt super obligated to study extra hard because there were so few people that often nobody would answer!
Don't be so sure that your family will keep abandoning you, it's possible sure, but there's always hope! Often they're surprised that you can leave the witnesses and live a normal, or even better than normal life (of course there's always the "blessed by satan" get out clause) but they do expect people who leave to get aids and die from a heroin overdose.
It's easy to prove them wrong! Either way though, you have your own family to look out for and you can learn what not to do!
On to the suggested reading. I've mentioned many on here before but I don't expect everyone to be aware of it all so here goes:
Reading (I have a kindle and love reading, but they're all available for ebook and in paperback)
Web
Pocasts
(all on iTunes etc, i like them because I can listen at work or download to my phone)
That's about it for now, if you soak all that in / want more / have suggestions let me know, and I'd love to hear what you think! :)
>Heck, what are your methods?
Science! :) The Scientific Method approach and the peer review process has proven, time and again, that it is extremely effective at preventing us from fooling ourselves based on intuition or wishful thinking. It also has built-in error checking, in that every scientist, by the very nature of science, is interested in disproving claims made by other scientists. If they can't, then it's (temporarily) true. Additionally, no scientist is going to submit information for peer review that they haven't checked and re-checked and re-re-checked, because the peer review process can be brutal and humiliating. The process is also extremely effective at discovering things about our universe that we are unable to detect with our five senses (example: the electromagnetic spectrum, which has changed our lives completely). Speculation and hypothesis are how ideas get started. I am very appreciative that we have these methods to test these speculations and hypotheses in order to sort the gold from the pyrite.
>Show me conflicting evidence against those cases - the ones that even the government acknowledges they had to put in their "This is a UFO" pile - and then one's skepticism might be grounded. [...] Some cases absolutely defy any attempt to classify the phenomenon as anything other than extraterrestrial.
Which ones?
>the practical entirety of the field [...] of science in general [...] is bridled by special interests (often very powerful financial interests) with agendas that prevent the challenging of long-held, long-standing, and established beliefs
This is why you've chosen the opinion of authors over the evidence presented by ancient historians and archaeologists? What do you mean by "field of science"? Science isn't housed in Science Headquarters in the Science Skyscraper in Scienceopolis. Science is just a word that describes a methodology for learning more about the world, and anyone can do it.
>even if those long-held beliefs are actually WRONG and debilitating - you're going to find that even valid research that has not been debunked or proven wrong will absolutely get put aside and shut down if it challenges the established system as it stands. [...] With this in mind, many of these ancient historians and archaeologists are more interested in making sure and simply "towing the party line" and perpetuating the established system
Are you speculating? Or are you claiming that this is true? If the latter, does that mean that you believe there's a conspiracy/cover-up scenario going on within the world of science, because they aren't allowed to finally say that there has been extraterrestrial visitation or advanced technologies? If that's the case, then why are they being censored? Why do you believe that your statement is true?
>lacking as that system may be
What is it that science hasn't discovered so far, or has discovered so far, that makes you find the system "lacking"? Is it lacking because science disagrees with some of your speculations? Our life expectancy is through the roof, comparatively. We've landed on other celestial bodies. We have a cures for terrible afflictions like polio and tuberculosis. We can use x-ray machines to see through our bodies. We have night-vision goggles, and telephones, and the internet, and wireless communication, and hearing aids, and prosthetic limbs, and mechanical hearts, and medicine that actually works, and on and on and on. I don't understand?
>the reason why the collective expertise of those in an established academic community is challenged (and far from "carelessly dismissed") is because the evidence simply points to that "expertise" being lacking and considerably limited.
What is the evidence that points to a lacking expertise in the established academic community? What is it that you're referring to? What is it that science has or hasn't done that has caused you to lose (or never have) confidence in the process?
>What - do you think that the knowledge that humans have garnered up to this point is, somehow, infallible and incapable of being wrong?
I never said that or implied it. I've stated that just because there are known gaps in our knowledge of how the world works doesn't mean we get to fill in those gaps of knowledge with speculation, and then claim that speculation to be true.
>the staunch effort that has often been made by the scientific and archaeological community to squelch certain areas of inquiry
Can you list a few examples?
>Much of the establishment, as a definite point of fact, has certainly shown itself to NOT allow many to be inspired by it. They actually kill the type of inspiration that can lead to real discoveries if that inspiration strays too far away from the set and established line of traditional inquiry.
Because this is a definite point of fact, can you list a few examples?
>There are many things we are very, very ignorant of on this planet.
Agreed! But that doesn't mean that Edgar Cayce had psychic powers (source #1, #2). There is an excellent book by Michael Shermer titled Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time, and he dedicates an entire chapter to Edgar Cayce. It's extremely informative, interesting, and (most importantly!) sourced. This list of 25 Reasons People Believe Weird Things is sort of a quick blueprint of Shermer's book, but with far less information, of course.
Why People Believe Weird Things by Michael Shermer
Why I Am Not A Christian by Bertrand Russell
The Bible by The Bronze Age.