Believe What You Want to Believe

No matter what you want to believe you can find someone who backs you up. Pick a topic–any topic. Whether you think global warming is a crisis or a hoax, whether you think second hand smoke is harmful or just fine, whether you think ‘sucks’ is a bad word or not, whether you think God hates homosexuals or not–whatever position you want to take you can find someone who holds that position, usually with more than flimsy rhetoric (OK, that last one is a bad example).

And it breaks my heart.

I’ve talked about this before concerning politics during the 2004 election and about the Jena 6 trial. Everyone is so completely biased that you can hardly trust them as sources. And if you trust them, someone else will discredit them. Whatever new detail comes out each side has to put their own spin on it so they come out ahead. It’s like every issue has turned into the aftermath of a presidential debate where both sides claim victory no matter what happened.

Even the supposedly non-biased news media have their slants and whether or not you want to trust a source like Fox News or the New York Times depends on your slant. It’s completely polarizing to the point that we just end up segregating into camps of like-minded people with our like-minded news and entertainment outlets.

And it’s OK if you disagree with me. I’m biased, so you can just write me off and ignore me.

5 thoughts on “Believe What You Want to Believe”

  1. I’m not sure I disagree with you, Kevin, I’m just skeptical … ;-) Seriously, though, sounds to me like what you’re alluding to here is “The Myth of Certainty.” That’s a great book, BTW, by one Daniel Taylor. Well worth picking up, IMHO.

    BTW — Have you seen the “ER” clip that’s making the rounds? It got me so kerfluffled, I had to blog out my frustration last night. I’d be interested in your take on it all.

  2. Haven’t read that book, but the idea sounds about right. Everybody thinks they’re certain, and they’re also certain the other guy is wrong. Gets to the point where you can’t even talk about it.

    Skepticism is great–the problem is when we’re skeptical of what everyone else thinks but certain of what we think. ;-)

    Saw your blog but didn’t watch the video yet. The emergent debate is yet another example of what I’m talking about. And a good example of when it gets ugly.

  3. This issue is without a doubt my least favorite thing in the world. As soon as we all accept that we’ll never know the truth about anything, then the truth doesn’t matter anymore, and civilization slowly goes to hell in a hand basket.

    If only there were some way to make the truth less elusive. I’ve never heard any good ideas for solutions or positive progress on this subject.

    We’ll all be agnostics soon.

  4. Josh, I think we can know the truth about some things, it’s just really hard. It requires sorting out the crackpots, and sorting out the pros and cons, and then honestly, directly and completely addressing each one.

    Unfortunately, that takes time and effort and patience. Which most people (myself included) don’t have for. It’s too easy to be lulled into complacency by the side you already agree with and begin to ignore and dismiss the contrary perspectives.

    I always come back to something Tim Yenter told me (and I swear, I quote this like he’s freaking Yoda or something)–whenever you’re debating something you should tackle your opponent’s strongest arguments first. It’s too easy to tackle the straw man, and it doesn’t do any good. It also gives a measure of respect to whoever you’re arguing with–and I think that’s necessary as well. It’s too easy to get angry and too hard to love.

  5. That last point would be helpful in so many discussions!
    What about the possibility that thinking I’m right doesn’t mean that I won’t or can’t listen to what you have to say? I don’t know if you’re talking about the blogosphere or an area of it or certain people or everyone, but I hope that for many of us, even real disagreements don’t have to mean the end of conversation.
    Like, if we’re talking and realize that we both vehemently disagree with each other’s position, we don’t have to slink away grumbling or write the other off as an ignorant/bigotted/whatever idiot. I actually like hearing perspectives different from my own, and want to understand better, in a deep way.
    How do you think we can keep talking and finding common ground after or during disagreement?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *