This is a conversation I had over the course of a day with a friend I knew from when I was a believer. I will post the conversation below as it happened through the instant messaging app in which we conversed. Following the conversation, I will leave some final comments and observations.
Me: There was something you said in one of your messages that I wanted to comment on. If now is not a good time, just ignore my message and let me know when you're able to talk.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seemed to indicate that we can choose our beliefs. Is that accurate?
Friend: It makes sense to me that we are free to choose what we think and believe.
Me: I disagree on that point. Our beliefs amount to a mental map of reality. We have beliefs about what is true and not true in the world we navigate. We form our beliefs by way of our experiences and we are either persuaded that something is true or not true. Once we have been convinced something is true or not true, we are not able to change that belief until new information is presented to us that we find compelling and forces our minds to be changed.
Friend: You say, "we form our beliefs; we are either persuaded or not; we have been convinced; we find compelling."
That sounds like we engage with our world, our experiences and info and choose how we respond.
I think it is clear that ultimately we are free to choose what we think, believe and act.
Me: Can you choose to find an argument or set of evidence convincing or not convincing? What convinces you (or not) is likely the result of other beliefs you hold that you didn't choose but inherited from your culture, education, etc.
Think about it. Even a mundane belief like "my keys are on top of my dresser". Could you choose to believe otherwise?
Friend: I agree that environment, inherited traits, etc. affect choices. However they are not solely or ultimately determinative.
Think about this - can anyone make you do what you do or do you ultimately choose? You choose to work, to love, to not do whatever, etc.
You sound like a Calvinist! 😆
Me: I'm not arguing that we have no liberty of will with regard to our actions. I'm merely talking about our ability to choose what we believe to be true or false.
Friend: I don't have to believe my keys are on the dresser. I simply evaluate the info at hand including my previous and current knowledge, and on that basis choose to believe that the keys are there. I act on what I believe.
Me: Wherever you currently believe your keys are, could you choose to believe that they were not there?
Friend: Am I not exercising my choice by believing my keys are a certain place, based on the info I choose to include in my belief?
Me: With the information you currently have available to you, could you choose to believe your keys were located somewhere else?
Friend: Yes I could choose different sets of info and believe my keys are not where I think / believe they are. I think and believe they are in my right pocket because I believe I placed them there. However, I could choose to doubt I put them in my pocket, and think that i left them in the building somewhere. There is a reality about where my keys are, but i choose what I believe about their location. Even if I want to confirm the actual location, I will choose my actions to confirm a belief. But even those confirmations will not determine what I ultimately think or believe. I will still exercise my freedom in choosing what to believe or think, no matter the evidence or reality. Don't I choose what I believe reality is to me? My choice may be accurate or not, but it is mine.
Me: Try to change a belief. Tell me something you believe is true or false right now and then try to believe the opposite.
Friend: Hmmmm. I once believed that the Missionary Baptist Church (ABA convention) was the most true church and that it stood in a direct faith line with John the Baptist, Jesus and His apostles. I was exposed to that teaching as a child and teenager. In high school, a teacher questioned this belief when I expressed it. That made me think. At times I was not sure that church denomination's traditions were all based in Scriptural accounts. Later as I came to learn of broader church history, I became convinced and believed that the Missionary Baptists were not the "true church" nor the "most pure" doctrinally. I still value the church i grew up in and believe they prioritized the Bible and most were good, sincere people who tried to follow Jesus as far as I know. But my belief about the church's history changed. Some, however, do believe their own church / denomination is most true or pure. All of those beliefs are free choices by those who hold them.
Some believe Jesus is the Son of God. Some do not. Sometimes people's beliefs change. Some believe the earth is flat. Some believe there has never been a moon landing. Some believe people in our own government set up 9/11. They choose to believe those things. Others do not.
You are not "made" or forced to believe or think. You are influenced, directed, manipulated, etc. But you still choose.
Me: I'm not saying beliefs cannot change. I'm saying that when they change it is not a result of our choice, but rather because we have been exposed to new information. If we believe something, we retain those beliefs until we are influenced by new information that is compelling to us based on other things we believe (e.g. what constitutes valid evidence etc).
Friend: Okay, I would say that information and experiences and many other factors influence belief but do not determine.
Friend: Yes, I believe people decide whether or not to believe bigfoot is real. Their decision or belief is influenced by evidence / other beliefs, but ultimately they choose what ti believe in regards to bigfoot.
Friend: I'd immerse myself in bigfoot evidence and conspiracy theories that call into question the more predominant view
Me: I do believe we have free will with regard to some things. I do not believe we have free will with regard to what we believe is true or not true about the world.
Why don't you immerse yourself in bigfoot culture so you can believe bigfoot is real?
________________________________________________________________
Me: There was something you said in one of your messages that I wanted to comment on. If now is not a good time, just ignore my message and let me know when you're able to talk.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seemed to indicate that we can choose our beliefs. Is that accurate?
Friend: It makes sense to me that we are free to choose what we think and believe.
Me: I disagree on that point. Our beliefs amount to a mental map of reality. We have beliefs about what is true and not true in the world we navigate. We form our beliefs by way of our experiences and we are either persuaded that something is true or not true. Once we have been convinced something is true or not true, we are not able to change that belief until new information is presented to us that we find compelling and forces our minds to be changed.
Friend: You say, "we form our beliefs; we are either persuaded or not; we have been convinced; we find compelling."
That sounds like we engage with our world, our experiences and info and choose how we respond.
I think it is clear that ultimately we are free to choose what we think, believe and act.
Me: Can you choose to find an argument or set of evidence convincing or not convincing? What convinces you (or not) is likely the result of other beliefs you hold that you didn't choose but inherited from your culture, education, etc.
Think about it. Even a mundane belief like "my keys are on top of my dresser". Could you choose to believe otherwise?
Friend: I agree that environment, inherited traits, etc. affect choices. However they are not solely or ultimately determinative.
Think about this - can anyone make you do what you do or do you ultimately choose? You choose to work, to love, to not do whatever, etc.
You sound like a Calvinist! 😆
Me: I'm not arguing that we have no liberty of will with regard to our actions. I'm merely talking about our ability to choose what we believe to be true or false.
Friend: I don't have to believe my keys are on the dresser. I simply evaluate the info at hand including my previous and current knowledge, and on that basis choose to believe that the keys are there. I act on what I believe.
Me: Wherever you currently believe your keys are, could you choose to believe that they were not there?
Friend: Am I not exercising my choice by believing my keys are a certain place, based on the info I choose to include in my belief?
Me: With the information you currently have available to you, could you choose to believe your keys were located somewhere else?
Friend: Yes I could choose different sets of info and believe my keys are not where I think / believe they are. I think and believe they are in my right pocket because I believe I placed them there. However, I could choose to doubt I put them in my pocket, and think that i left them in the building somewhere. There is a reality about where my keys are, but i choose what I believe about their location. Even if I want to confirm the actual location, I will choose my actions to confirm a belief. But even those confirmations will not determine what I ultimately think or believe. I will still exercise my freedom in choosing what to believe or think, no matter the evidence or reality. Don't I choose what I believe reality is to me? My choice may be accurate or not, but it is mine.
Me: Try to change a belief. Tell me something you believe is true or false right now and then try to believe the opposite.
Friend: Hmmmm. I once believed that the Missionary Baptist Church (ABA convention) was the most true church and that it stood in a direct faith line with John the Baptist, Jesus and His apostles. I was exposed to that teaching as a child and teenager. In high school, a teacher questioned this belief when I expressed it. That made me think. At times I was not sure that church denomination's traditions were all based in Scriptural accounts. Later as I came to learn of broader church history, I became convinced and believed that the Missionary Baptists were not the "true church" nor the "most pure" doctrinally. I still value the church i grew up in and believe they prioritized the Bible and most were good, sincere people who tried to follow Jesus as far as I know. But my belief about the church's history changed. Some, however, do believe their own church / denomination is most true or pure. All of those beliefs are free choices by those who hold them.
Some believe Jesus is the Son of God. Some do not. Sometimes people's beliefs change. Some believe the earth is flat. Some believe there has never been a moon landing. Some believe people in our own government set up 9/11. They choose to believe those things. Others do not.
You are not "made" or forced to believe or think. You are influenced, directed, manipulated, etc. But you still choose.
Me: I'm not saying beliefs cannot change. I'm saying that when they change it is not a result of our choice, but rather because we have been exposed to new information. If we believe something, we retain those beliefs until we are influenced by new information that is compelling to us based on other things we believe (e.g. what constitutes valid evidence etc).
Friend: Okay, I would say that information and experiences and many other factors influence belief but do not determine.
Me: What determines whether or not we are convinced if it is not those things?
Friend: We are self determining beings. I think all factors are influencing but not ultimately determinative because we are created free. You think all the factors as ultimately determinative. I'm not sure we can reason our way to agreement.
Me: Did you try to change one of your beliefs? Were you able to do it?
I just know that there has never been a belief that I have held or changed that wasn't the result of being convinced by being presented with an argument or evidence that compelled me to believe or disbelieve. I have never had an adjustment in belief because I decided I would like to believe something.
Friend: The only assertion I'm making is that the new info did not determine your new belief. It shaped your belief, influenced it, but did not determine. You were free to choose what you believe. People with basically the same info and experiences often believe differing things about any number of subjects. Maybe it's hard to see the line between influence and determinism.
Influence can be so great that it looks like compulsion / determinism?
Me: What is an example of something you believe that you choose to believe in spite of evidence that it is not true?
Friend: I'm not sure your question makes sense to me? I choose to accept certain things as true based on evidence for and against that I have access to. To me, what i believe is true, whether it is actually true or not. But what is the basis / standard for real truth? That is another philosophical issue.
Me: People believe things that are not true, but those things that are not true that people believe, they believe them because they have been convinced (either for good reasons or bad reasons) that the claim is true. No one believes things that they think are not true.
I DO think people can be protective of their beliefs and restrict the information they expose themselves to, but even their reluctance to expose their beliefs and/or willingness to have certain beliefs challenged is the result of other beliefs.
Consider this. I don't believe that big foot creatures are real. I disbelieve claims about the existence of big foot creatures because the evidence that advocates put forward has been shown to be either fake or not what the believers thought it was. And in addition to that, we would expect to find physical evidence if there actually were large primates living in forests in North America. My belief could be changed if there was valid evidence brought forward that was verified by credible sources. I would probably also want some explanations as to why we had not discovered that evidence in the past, but I would be open to hearing an explanation.
...however, without that evidence, I could not decide to believe that big foot creatures exist.
Reflect on this example for a minute. Do you believe there are big foot creatures? If not, could you decide to believe that they are real?
Me: Do you believe bigfoot is real?
Friend: Yes I do
😆
Me: 😕
Friend: Sorry, I think bigfoot is a mythical creature
Me: Ok. Try to choose to believe that bigfoot is real.
Friend: That seems nonsensical to me
Me: That's my point.
How would you choose to believe bigfoot is real?
Me: Your mind might be changed if you did that.
Friend: Just because I don't choose to believe in bigfoot doesn't mean I couldn't believe that
I think your premise isn't making sense to me
I believe we have free will
You do not
Why don't you immerse yourself in bigfoot culture so you can believe bigfoot is real?
Friend: My choice about what I believe leads me not to choose to immerse myself in bigfoot theory.
Me: Choose to want to do that.
Friend: I do not choose to do that. I choose not to do that.
Me: Could you choose otherwise?
Friend: You can't create this box that proves your point. This is a discussion that has been going on for millennia. Even some Christians believe humans are not self determining. I think we are. For all eternity.
Me: I just know from my own experience, I am not able to will myself into believing things that I do not hold to be true. Perhaps your experience is different.
Friend: That sounds like a nonsensical but true statement. I cannot will to believe that which I do not hold to be true. Ok?
You choose what you believe to be true.
Me: We believe things because we are convinced they are true and we care about what is true. To decide to believe things without regard to whether or not they are true would be irrational and detrimental to our ability to navigate in the world successfully.
Friend: I agree, but we all make choices about what we believe to be true. We are self-determining.
So I think it makes sense that a God who loves allows people to freely choose how to respond to Him. That freedom is a logical characteristic of God's good and loving character.
Me: If it wasn't true that we were able to choose our beliefs, would you want to figure that out?
Friend: I think that would be substantial. Wouldn't you want to know if you could choose your beliefs?
Me: Yes.
How would you figure it out if your belief about our free will to choose beliefs was not true?
Friend: Reason?
Me: How would reason lead to a conclusion about what we can or cannot will ourselves to do? I don't understand how that would work.
In Galileo's time, the church reasoned that the sun and moon were perfect spheres. They reasoned that the earth had imperfections (mountains, valleys, rugged terrain, etc) because of sin. There was no sin in the heavens, so those heavenly bodies could not be imperfect. Galileo pointed his telescope at the moon and observed craters, mountains, valleys, and imperfections. The Church leaders responded that there was an invisible crystal sphere surrounding the moon that was perfectly spherical. This was an ad hoc invention they were using to preserve their doctrinal belief about the nature of the earth and the heavens and what perfection was about.
You seem to be tying your belief about our will to what you believe is necessarily true about the nature of the Christian god. You have not been able to produce any examples of choosing to change a belief based only on an act of will, but you can't let go of the idea that you do not possess that power because you don't want to believe Yahweh would make us that way. You are starting with the conclusion rather than looking at the evidence and allowing the conclusion to fall from the evidence.
Friend: I have not asserted that one would change their beliefs just as an act of the will, but that ultimately one's beliefs are chosen / self determined rather than simply programmed in by all that is outside of self. Yes, the self takes into account all the factors it chooses and ultimately those impact but they do not finally determine. This position is not dependent on belief in God. Some who believe in God feel that His sovereignty ultimately means He determines every action. Others who do not believe in God believe humans are self-determining. One can search determinism v free will and find positions all over the spectrum, without respect to religious conviction.
My view of free will is [not] necessarily the "Christian" viewpoint. Yes, I do think it fits in my theological belief system, but I didn't try to make that so. Many Christians historically don't actually believe we are self-determining. I have considered those assertions over many years as well as yours today. But I don't find them persuasive. I don't agree with that reasoning to this point.
Me: Do you agree with my characterization of the beliefs that we hold as a mental map of reality?
Friend: I feel I would have to identify the meaning of your terms in that definition, and I do not have time to do that just now.
I do not believe that you will deconstruct my free will position. I do not hold it from an unexamined process. And I do not see the point, as it is not universally held as critical to a Christian belief system. Which I assume you are trying to deconstruct with this line of discussion? Maybe my assumption is wrong.
Me: More about the fact of the matter than about the relation to Christian doctrine.
Friend: Got it. Going to be tied up the next few hours. At this point, I think this is an area we simply disagree about. Don't know that we can resolve the free will v determinism debate.
__________________________________________________________________
I just want to leave a final reflection here. I have had similar conversations with other believers. I have never been presented with any actual example of a belief that the person can simply choose to change. This friend states that we have the choice as fact. He seems to think he has reasoned to that position and he insists that it isn't dependent on his religious commitments. However he cites his understanding of the nature of the Christian god in support of his belief that we have free will more than once in the conversation. "I think it makes sense that a God who loves allows people to freely choose how to respond to Him. That freedom is a logical characteristic of God's good and loving character."
It is certainly true that there are both believers and nonbelievers who believe we have free will and people on both sides of the religious divide who believe that we do not have free will. However, it seems to me that this friend has rooted his notions about whether we can choose our beliefs in his beliefs about the character of the god he believes created us.
This kind of reasoning seems less concerned about what actually is the case in the world than it is concerned with what must if all the other assumptions in the person's worldview are accurate.
My friend can't seem to choose to change any of his beliefs. He can't choose to want to cause himself to change the beliefs he holds, yet he is convinced that he possesses that power because that's the way a god with the character he believes in would make us.
My friend can't seem to choose to change any of his beliefs. He can't choose to want to cause himself to change the beliefs he holds, yet he is convinced that he possesses that power because that's the way a god with the character he believes in would make us.
This is analogous to the Catholic church refusing to accept that the moon had craters and mountains because heavenly bodies had to be perfectly spherical because there was no sin in heaven. It's reasonable as long as you accept all of the assumptions and ignore all the evidence.
Thanks for stopping by,
Gavagai
Thanks for stopping by,
Gavagai
Comments
Post a Comment