The Plank in Your Own Eye...

Hey all! I know it's weird for me to be writing two posts somewhat close to each other considering how horrible I am with consistency, but I have quite a few issues/topics on my mind due to lots of discussions here and there. So, before I forget everything, I figure I would log a few things here and there to share with others...

Anyways, one of the books that was assigned for Social Psychology is Being Wrong by Kathryn Schulz. It definitely is an interesting read and something I would recommend to anyone who is held fast by certainty or knows somebody who is. Unfortunately, I can't cover too much of the book (since it would just be better to read the book itself haha). But, one of the parts I found very interesting was the idea of the "'Cuz It's True Constraint." This constraint has to do with the bias people have in their own beliefs and not recognizing it. Yet, people are readily able to point out what they believe is the bias in other people's beliefs. Even though this may sound confusing to say (since I'm getting confused just typing it haha), the essential idea is that people think that what they believe in has to be true, simply because they believe in it. In other words, people don't believe in something they know is wrong (possibly not morally, but truth wise).

People are far less able to accurately point out their own bias when it comes to things. There tends to be some form of justification that makes it so we sound even and fair, yet we readily may see questionable aspects about other people's beliefs. To make this a little bit easier to understand, let's say your friend is part of some tea company. Your friend constantly raves about how good the tea is and how you should try some. When you ask him why he likes his tea so much, he says something to the degree of that it just tastes so good. Yet, you think that this is not the case, and part of the reason why he promotes so much is so that he gets more sales for his company, thus leading to possible recognition in the company and commissions. But, if you were in the position of the one working for the tea company, you may be not so readily to accept those answers as explanations to your own behavior.

Sigh, that is a rather crude example, but hopefully it gets the point across... Anyways, sometimes one may be questioned as to why another's belief, assuming that it is ultimately true, is not believed by everyone. In other words, if you have the ultimate truth, and it's so easy to grasp, then why hasn't everyone taken it and believed? Schulz said that we have three assumptions to defend against this question: the Ignorance Assumption, the Idiocy Assumption, and the Evil Assumption. All of these assumptions I find interesting, but for space's sake (and for the attention span of anyone who actually has read this far), I'll just be focusing on the Ignorance Assumption for now.

The Ignorance Assumption states that the reason people may not believe in something is simply because they have not heard of it yet. Thus, how can one believe in something that they have not heard of and thus know nothing about? The idea that follows out of this belief, then, is to let others know of your belief. This typically can happen through just talking with others, debates, discussions, messages, etc. Thus, the idea is to get out your message to other people, since if other people know about your truth, they'll come to believe too, right?

Humm... Even just writing that sarcastically sounds awfully funny to me. The sad thing is, though, that this seems to be a heavily purported belief, whether or not it's apparent at first. Of course, those not made aware of this bias may not even recognize that it's affecting them, which is part of the funny business of bias itself...

Just coming from a Christian environment, I have to say this is one of the most common assertions I've heard as to why not everyone believes in Christianity. Personally speaking, I've heard so many teachers and religious figures tell me that we need to go out and spread the Gospel since so many people have not heard it before. Yet, from those I've talked with and from what I've heard, I don't know if that's truly the case... Of course, I recognize that I haven't run through every single environment (in fact, my sample is rather limited...), and thus I cannot speak for every single possible case. But, regardless, many of the people that I've talked to about religious beliefs have heard of the message of the Gospel, and they have said that others around them have heard as well. In fact, some people have felt insulted for the question ever being posed. They have heard of the Gospel and assertions for why it is the truth, yet they choose not to believe in it due to other reasons.

But wait! A possible interjection is that maybe they haven't heard the true message of the Gospel. In other words, the "Gospel" that they came across may be a misconstrual of the actual message. Thus, it would be important to go out and tell more people, so the true message may be known. I guess it would be nice if that was truly the case, but this does raise a major concern, for lack of a better word. Yes, it may be true that not everyone has heard the Gospel in its truest form. The question arises, though, of how people come to know about it (the Gospel) in the first place. Going to a little bit of what I've heard, read, and posted before (for those that have read previous entries), most of the information that we come to learn about others and their beliefs is simply through others themselves. If we see someone who labels himself as a Christian and have no other form of exposure to Christianity, we may think that what that person says and does truly represents Christianity, whether or not it is actually the case. Thus, others may have learned about Christianity from others, whether or not the representations accurately reflect the religion. If it is negative, then yes, it may be good for them to see Christianity accurately.

Yet, going out and telling people without any preparation or personally having a full understanding of Christianity itself may cause more harm than good, especially if the person being witnessed to correctly understands Christianity. If one goes out without being fully prepared, they may push people farther away from Christianity rather than close to it, thus indirectly causing the problem they're trying to solve. Thus, it would be important to accurately for one to know why they believe what they do believe. Unfortunately, many people have taken this Ignorance Assumption quite seriously and have gone out preaching to others without fully understanding Christianity itself nor fully understanding other people's viewpoints. I may just be somewhat adverse to this idea simply because I've grown up in a Christian environment for so long, and this is one of the ideas I've heard constantly advocated. So yes, I recognize that I may be bias in this issue, but I still think it's something important for others who may have faced such a similar environment to recognize as well. Please don't think that I'm trying to say it's not important for one to be able to represent and share their beliefs, but I am advocating to correctly understand why one believes what they believe so it can be shared properly with others.

How ironic... Every time I start to write, I keep on trying to cut down how much I say so I can keep people's interest until the end. Alas, I seem to have gone a tad bit long-winded again, and I didn't even get to say all of what I wanted to say... Hum, my bad... Well, thank you to anyone who has actually read all the way until now, and I hope, at the very least, that I have given you some food for thought.