Is belief a choice?

[Justin108]

Christians tell me all the time that atheist deserve hell because they "chose" to reject god by not believing in him. They tell me that of I believe then I will be saved as though I can simply choose what I want to believe. How is belief a choice?

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

[Lotan]

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

I sure would! Thank you, George!

[Bust Nak]

How is belief a choice?

It isn't. I can choose to go to church, I can choose to pray, but I can't choose to believe.

[Mithrae]

Christians tell me all the time that atheist deserve hell because they "chose" to reject god by not believing in him. They tell me that of I believe then I will be saved as though I can simply choose what I want to believe. How is belief a choice?

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

Assuming that's a rhetorical question, are you implying that belief is not a matter of choice?

You're suggesting that conservative Christians cannot choose to be sceptical about their beliefs?

Edit: Welcome to the forum by the way

[Bust Nak]

Assuming that's a rhetorical question, are you implying that belief is not a matter of choice?

You're suggesting that conservative Christians cannot choose to be sceptical about their beliefs?

I won't speak for Justin108. I openly state that belief is not a mater of choice. You can be as skeptical as you like but you did not and cannot choose to believe.

[aguy]

Christians tell me all the time that atheist deserve hell because they "chose" to reject god by not believing in him. They tell me that of I believe then I will be saved as though I can simply choose what I want to believe. How is belief a choice?

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

I see that your usergroup is "atheist". You made a choice when you joined a user group.

Just think about all the things that we call nature. How did they all come to exists. The answer is a choice. What is your answer/choice?

[Mithrae]

Assuming that's a rhetorical question, are you implying that belief is not a matter of choice?

You're suggesting that conservative Christians cannot choose to be sceptical about their beliefs?

I won't speak for Justin108. I openly state that belief is not a mater of choice. You can be as skeptical as you like but you did not and cannot choose to believe.

> Do you mean that belief is a default position, from which we can choose increasing levels of scepticism?
> Or do you mean that we can choose differing levels of scepticism, but belief is something different, unrelated and unchosen?

Based on our past discussions you can't mean the first one. But the second one doesn't make sense to me: What is scepticism, if not questioning and abstaining from certain (or all) beliefs?

In theory I could be sceptical that anything exists besides my own mind. But I can't believe everything, because it's very difficult to affirm a contradictory pair. Direct personal experience provides a median point - we mostly believe and are rarely sceptical of the things we experience on a day-to-day basis. That's an axiom of epistemology.

The further we move away from that median point, the more open our views are to personal preference. I've got relatives who choose to believe that evolution is false, because it's not part of their personal experience and nor for the most part is the scientific theory behind it; but one aunt is fairly well aware of the scientific basis and still chooses to believe it's false. I choose to believe that it's true.

Heck, I even choose to believe that the inside of my skull mostly consists of nothing at all! It's a pretty whacky view, but to my knowledge that's what atomic theory suggests, so I choose to believe it. I could just as easily choose to be sceptical, could I not?


It would probably take quite a bit of effort to make myself believe that Justin is George Clooney - I'm not sure that I personally could manage that feat without months or even years of training - but you just need to look at the hype around popular music acts or major political issues to get a feel for how malleable belief is. Not always in a short-term "I'm gonna believe THIS now" fashion, but definitely in longer terms of how we think about things. Otherwise we could do nothing but pity all those screaming fans, bible-thumpin' fundies and flag-waving patriots.

[Bust Nak]

> Do you mean that belief is a default position, from which we can choose increasing levels of scepticism?
> Or do you mean that we can choose differing levels of scepticism, but belief is something different, unrelated and unchosen?

Based on our past discussions you can't mean the first one. But the second one doesn't make sense to me: What is scepticism, if not questioning and abstaining from certain (or all) beliefs?

I am mostly saying the second: skepticism related to beliefs, it is indeed questioning and abstaining from certain (or all) beliefs. But skepticism is not the same thing as beliefs, and unlike beliefs can be chosen.

In theory I could be sceptical that anything exists besides my own mind. But I can't believe everything, because it's very difficult to affirm a contradictory pair. Direct personal experience provides a median point - we mostly believe and are rarely sceptical of the things we experience on a day-to-day basis. That's an axiom of epistemology.

While this is all true, it doesn't get at the heart of the topic. Choosing to believe, as opposed to being convinced by direct personal experiences.

The further we move away from that median point, the more open our views are to personal preference. I've got relatives who choose to believe that evolution is false, because it's not part of their personal experience and nor for the most part is the scientific theory behind it; but one aunt is fairly well aware of the scientific basis and still chooses to believe it's false. I choose to believe that it's true.

I am saying such a thing is impossible. Believe or nor believe, there is no choice.

Heck, I even choose to believe that the inside of my skull mostly consists of nothing at all! It's a pretty whacky view, but to my knowledge that's what atomic theory suggests, so I choose to believe it. I could just as easily choose to be sceptical, could I not?

Being skeptial is not the opposite of believe. You can be skeptial of atomic theory and believe atomic theory at the same time.

It would probably take quite a bit of effort to make myself believe that Justin is George Clooney - I'm not sure that I personally could manage that feat without months or even years of training - but you just need to look at the hype around popular music acts or major political issues to get a feel for how malleable belief is.

Malleable sure, but it's not under your control. You may actually believe after repeatedly acting as in you believe, that is not choosing to believe.

Not always in a short-term "I'm gonna believe THIS now" fashion, but definitely in longer terms of how we think about things. Otherwise we could do nothing but pity all those screaming fans, bible-thumpin' fundies and flag-waving patriots.

You can try to convince them otherwise, some of them can be convinced. It just wouldn't be a choice on their part.

[Justin108]

Christians tell me all the time that atheist deserve hell because they "chose" to reject god by not believing in him. They tell me that of I believe then I will be saved as though I can simply choose what I want to believe. How is belief a choice?

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

Assuming that's a rhetorical question, are you implying that belief is not a matter of choice?

You're suggesting that conservative Christians cannot choose to be sceptical about their beliefs?

Edit: Welcome to the forum by the way

Hmmm... tough one... I'd say that being skeptical is different from choosing what to believe in that to be skeptical is do deliberate more on the facts. Conservative Christians may choose not to take the steps of critical analysis but that isn't the same as choosing what to believe. I'd say skepticism is merely a step in your reasoning. Either way, you cannot deside on what conclusion your reason follows without being dishonest with yourself.

PS. Thanks

[Justin108]

Christians tell me all the time that atheist deserve hell because they "chose" to reject god by not believing in him. They tell me that of I believe then I will be saved as though I can simply choose what I want to believe. How is belief a choice?

If I offered you $10 000 to believe that I was George Clooney, would you start choosing to believe I'm George Clooney?

I see that your usergroup is "atheist". You made a choice when you joined a user group.

Just think about all the things that we call nature. How did they all come to exists. The answer is a choice. What is your answer/choice?

I chose that group out of honesty. I could have chosen the Christian group but I would be lying if I said I was a Christian. Like Bust Nak said; I can choose to go to chearch, I can choose to pray and in this case I can choose to join the Christian group but I cannot choose to actually believe what Christians believe.

As for your second comment; the answer is not a choice. I cannot choose how everything came to exist. I can choose to give an answer to your question but the answer is based on what I already believe - not the other way around.