The proliferation of wild conspiracy theories, the increased fanaticism of some religious and political groups, and a growing mountain of scams and swindles has me wondering why people believe the sources they do. Why do they dismiss credible information and latch onto incredible stuff, stuff that would make laughable fiction? Is it really as simple as believing what they already want to hear? Is that why so many of them continue to hang on every word of loons and con artists who’ve been wrong, who failed to deliver the results, over and over and over? Why do they look to that preacher/politician/talking head/celebrity/friend/anonymous dude on the web/whoever for answers? And what’s different in the minds and hearts of those who don’t believe the nonsense? What’s different about those who say, “I want to believe you, so I will,” and those who say, “I want to believe you, but I don’t?” Are there gullibility and skepticism genes? (And why should I believe you if you say there are?)

Interesting question. In addition to gullibility and skepticism, are there stupidity genes?

When we were in Junior High and High School we were all very aware of who were the smart kids and who were the stupid ones. The test scores and grades made it clear.

But in life milling around as grown ups, its not so obvious for the most part who's sharp and who's not and we seem to accept that we are all the same and surprised when someone believes something that lacks evidence.

A lot of people who seem smart are still lacking street smarts which are critical when it comes to not being a sucker. People with street smarts know enough to say, "Oh yeah? Prove it!" . . . to everything.

you are stuck with Ideology & Belief.

Generally speaking my response to somebody asking me to believe a proposal is "Prove it"
Rum and coke is bad for your health statement!
OK prove it! If you can show empirical evidence to support your claim then I will accept the possibility that it might be true. But only after further investigation supports your claim will I totally accept it..

If you want to see ridiculous come-ons wanting you to believe fantasy try Craigslist's activities section

This is very likely the longest-running conundrum of my life. I started thinking about this problem when I was in elementary school, and I've never stopped.

Although I probably first began thinking about this in regard to my own, extended, maternal family, many puzzling situations also centered around kids I was growing up with (we were mostly all a pretty cohesive group for those twelve years), because some of the things they accepted basically "on faith" (though they firmly, and often fervently, "believed" in them too!), were, very plainly, nonsense (at least it certainly appeared to be nonsense to me).

My Mom would frequently speak and behave in deeply hurtful, and often just plain "dumb"/self-defeating ways that made no "sense" on ANY level--and yet I knew (even as a young child) that she was as smart as anyone else I knew who was her age or older.

All these years later: I still don't know the answer to those dilemmas I began pondering when I was maybe six years old.

Right now, it seems to me that (making H-U-G-E generalizations) there are at least two different internal "wirings" that people are either born with, or acquire very early as they grow up, at least one of which is "sensible," "logical," perhaps "caring," even "wise"--and at least one other of which is NOT any of these things (beyond the point of self-preservation--most everyone has a basic sense of self-preservation which works reliably enough so that they, as individuals, can continue to live).

I can think back, during my growing-up years, to times, and to conversations I had, with specific people (emphatically including many of the kids I grew up with), and I still shake my head not only at what those specific kids actually "were" at that time, but also at what they grew up to be, which too often was some variation on my mother and my father, and this also applies to my maternal-side relatives (who, though they are now all deceased, changed not a micro-bit during their lives which continued on after I grew up).

I don't know if "it" (whether a person is cognitively and emotionally one "kind" of person or the other) is formed in utero, or during childhood and adolescence, or maybe from the surroundings one finds oneself in as an adult, but I DO "know" (from a lifetime of personal experience) that it appears to me to be permanent "wiring." I read or hear stories about people who DID change from the one kind of person to the other, and I accept that such "conversions" CAN happen....as I also accept (from my life experience with countless different individuals) that people seldom DO change in these cognitive and emotional ways.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2021 01:46PM by Tevai.

So you might be looking at two distinct ways of navigating life: Belief or Reason.
If scrape everything down to bedrock, seems this is what remains.

Belief means certainty, so one can afford to be smugly absolute, intolerant even; but the cost is continually fending off information, as information tends to contaminate the belief. (Or can selectively forage only information which supports, discarding all else as "fake") Far more comfortable and secure. These folks tend to be righteous, often angry and intolerant, but certain.

Reason means taking raw information and hammering out theories of how-things-work and therefore what-to-do, so one becomes an insatiable forager of information. Problem is perpetual uncertainty: any theory may be immediately displaced by new information. Though open to information, these folks tend to be uncertain, self-questioning, and may tend towards anxiety/depression.

And this here is just theory, of course -- but take a look around

Has nothing to do with IQ

Because they got it right when it really mattered.
I believe Sam Harris, because he wrote what I think was the greatest response to 9-11 ever published.
God Delusion was great, but no comparison to Letter to a Christian Nation.
To date he had the greatest response to 1/6
https://youtu.be/c-pTYLhitds
But I would love to see a greater response to those two events or more of an eloquent speaker.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2021 03:34PM by schrodingerscat.

I believe in trying to get away with doing things my way. It doesn't always work, which is a good thing, because then I would be totally out of control! I would be a narcissistic megalomaniac, insufferable on dates, probably running for high office, and cheating at golf!

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would be a narcissistic megalomaniac,
> insufferable on dates, probably running for high
> office, and cheating at golf!

That would be a real covfefe.

I like my covfefe black ...

Well I guess you aren't Donald after all. . .

From written information and from observing people, I believe that people are influenced from both their genes and from their environment. I have wished more than once that we were free to pick and choose how these two influences would play out in our life - you know, that we would magically have the ability to understand and see the whole picture and make the very best choices possible.

In my own life trust in people was marred by early childhood abuse and, because of this, I believe that who I trust, who I believe, has always been difficult and fearful. In attending university, where I felt I really gained the tools to think critically, I began to feel I had gained the ability to master this and take my time, to evaluate who was "safe" to believe.

Mostly this works well, but interestingly sometimes I feel that both my genes and my old environment can surface in traumatic situations....like the fight or flight syndrome and my first response is that I MUST choose quickly, I think this is because this was required when I was abused.

Wow.

Another great post, touching on a lot of important issues, including whether free will actually exists, the role of trauma in personality development, the advantage intelligence and education make in curtailing the damage, and the extent to which some of that damage is permanent and appears in times of stress. That fight-or-flight conundrum is of course related to PTSD. . .

Are you perchance a shrink? You'd make a very good one.

Those I know well enough to know they don't lie.