Is it that we don’t make mistakes on purpose when we judge the actions and intents of others…but we do make mistakes?
It’s common to imagine things that aren’t really happening. And based on these imaginary happenings, do we then expect certain things to happen in the future?
What causes these mistakes (called “fundamental attribution errors”) of observation? Social psychologists Lee Ross & Richard E Nisbett* say in their book The Person and the Situation we naturally give attention to human beings and mostly ignore their situations.
And so social problems come about naturally when we don’t pay attention to context. Is a noun almost useless without a verb?
* Ross, Lee; Nisbett, Richard E. (2011-10-25). The Person and the Situation Pinter & Martin. Kindle Edition.
Could it be the propensity to believe in the magical and miraculous? Do religions grow by promising eternal life and by telling stories of miracles truly believed by those who are spreading them?
There is real comfort received from sincerely believing one will have a wonderful life after death which goes on forever and ever where it will be impossible to become bored. The promise of living joyously throughout eternity is claimed to be the case because it comes from a source that cannot lie.
A believer is assured he or she is one of the chosen who were predestined before the foundation of the world to live in glory with God and His angles forever and ever as stated in the source that cannot lie.
It is also promised that after judgment, all the rest of us will be spending eternity receiving continuous torture in a place filled with fire and brimstone. Why will we suffer? Because we never heard or we said “no thanks” to the good news stated in the source that cannot lie.
Can the source that cannot lie be trusted? Probably not. What are the odds the “Gospel” is just a great story passed down to us which has a dramatic ending and delivers huge magical promises which give hope, longing, and comfort to believers?
Every human will be aware forever…is a true statement.
Every human will be aware forever…is a false statement.
Which of the two statements above has a far better chance of being true?
(A hint is below.)
One statement involves magical and miraculous thinking, the other is the result of reason.
How do we choose between fact and belief? How many of us are willing to admit our brains create ways of supporting what we want to happen? What we want to be the case.
Can knowing we all have this automatic prejudice help us notice the old and each new stream of justifying ideas and theories?
And could this ability of noticing assist us in being more aware in general and to better see reality which is truth at full strength. So, what are we wanting to be true? Why seek truth when we are convinced we have it already?
Is it that total diversity is the only fixed thing? Is the idea that each thing is somehow different from all other things probably true but still at bottom a belief — a theory that can never be proven beyond a shadow?
Is trying to prove total diversity a crazy adventure? Is the answer yes because every thing in the universe would have to be examined and recorded and compared with everything else in existence? What about the tools that it would take to measure the biggest and smallest of things?
And isn’t there then the impossible problem of all the measuring tools needed for each category of objects to be measured having to be exactly the same? Then who will measure the measuring tools to make sure they will yield correct results, etc.? Since all of that is impossible, we would be left with having to create one super tool to measure everything.
What about the tool problem again and the huge crew of robot operators needed to keep the super tool calibrated and free from wear? Let’s say all this happens and off the tool goes on its impossible task and billions of years later it reports back to say that the “diversity belief” now should read … “No two things are exactly alike at the same time. But this too has to be investigated.”
So, why not use the standard idea? Isn’t it probable enough from what’s been observed so far that no two things are exactly alike? No. Well yes if you have to have it be easy. Can all quarks be different from all other quarks and can all of the atoms of the same element be different too? What about energy? Is all energy the same at its simplest? Are all viewpoints unique? Of course language is tricky and slippery.
Is there no end to exactness in the real world? And if we have to have it, doesn’t it create one impossible situation after another? Is it that physical exactness has to be relative and if so where does the real non relative form of exactness reside — the type that’s the same no matter whose mind it’s in?
Do we live in a self-created area thinking mostly about the tips of the edges? Are all-or-nothing thoughts natural mental traps which automatically blur the vast middle ground? Are we all part of the great diversity?
Is our human animal our special god? It supplies everything for us; it has all of the creativity and talents and uses us to get along in society or not. One day our creature will die, will our sole support (our special god) then be dead?
What happens then? Is it that we can’t know for sure so we make things up? What is so important about existing forever? Is the most important thing about it is it would be magical if it were to happen?
What would happen if we started talking to ourselves as our own best friend would talk to us (the heartbeat of a great marriage) and not as our own best critic does? Is it possible to let the critic rest and make time for the friend? For a while very day? Can I choose one or the other? Perhaps the best a person can do is to make time for the friend and then more time. Then who knows? Into different waters for sure? A possible new great marriage to myself?