Are You A Beliefaholic?

I had a good discussion with a ‘born again’ Christian recently. These talks always give me fascinating food for thought. Particularly interesting was his view on global warming, and the conspiracy he thinks lies behind it. Needless to say his knowledge of basic science was pretty thin. It may be that the less one knows, the more certain one tends to be⁽¹⁾. This fits the general Taoist view that out of nothing comes something, i.e., the myriad creatures in the world are born from something, and something from nothing. In other words, the force driving behind addiction is a visceral sense of emptiness. Addiction helps blot out the feeling of emptiness. I reckon this is true across the board, whether addicted to work, alcohol, cocaine, sex, tobacco, or yes, a belief. We cling to anything that promises to fill the void.

Tobacco was one of my addictions. I see some parallels between the Christian’s belief in the ’story’ and my experience with tobacco. Note, I separate belief in the story from the useful things Christ said. I can verified through my experience much of what he said, but not the story (myth). The unique thing about belief is that it requires no verification. Faith is the leg upon which belief stands, and rationalization is the leg upon which faith often stands.

Back to tobacco. I acknowledged the scientific evidence that smoking contributed to cancer and such, but only halfheartedly. I also conjured up the rationalizations necessary to paint the evidence in the least serious light possible. I wanted to smoke and I just wasn’t going to let any facts get in the way!

Those who refute global warming are rationalizing their stance a lot further than I did with smoking. At least I acknowledged the science. That is probably because I am science literate, while my Christian friends tend to be more science illiterate. Science, at its core, offers no solid belief to stand upon. As evidence presents itself, whatever one may have ‘believed’ to be so changes accordingly. That is very unsettling to anyone who needs solid unchanging ground to stand upon. I imagine that helps explain the historical tension that exists between science and religion.

Now, where does the ‘taoist point of view’ lie in all this? Actually, probably in both realms. For those who require solidity, there is the dogma and ritual based ‘Taoism of the people’. For those at ease with emptiness, if not actively doing their utmost to attain emptiness, there is the welcome ideal of a teaching that uses no words, and the benefit of resorting to no action. The later, although closer to science, steps ‘outside the boxes’ of both religion and science. It is bizarre, when you think about it. No solid ground anywhere. As chapter 67 puts it, it is vast and resembles nothing. If it resembled anything, it would, long before now, have become small.

I was going to title this post, Russian Roulette Anyone? Like Russian roulette, let’s say (hypothetically) there was only a 1 in 6 chance that global warming was really happening. Would it not be wise to error on the side of safety? We do this all the time in product safety issues, for example. Indeed, if the evidence had indicated that I had a 1 in 6 chance of getting lung cancer, I might have quite sooner. With global warming⁽²⁾ , the evidence points to a much better than 1 in 6 chance, and the evidence continues to mount. Curiously this drives the true believers in ‘there is no climate warming’ to clutch all the more at any rationalization that discounts the evidence.

Considered simply from a symptoms point of view, I’d say such people need to have global warming not be true. Sure, I expect most people would prefer it not to be true. However, denial of evidence is simply ‘putting one’s head in the sand’. Why do we do that? Addiction to belief, plain and simple. Fear prevents us from entertaining any view that would lead to impartiality and destroy the beliefs we happen to cherish. Taking sides is what we do, and belief addition⁽³⁾ keeps us there.

⁽¹⁾ On the other hand, the more I deeply accept that I don’t know, the less able I am to be certain about anything. I suppose feeling certainty that I don’t know is a way to know yet to think that one does not know.

⁽²⁾ Personally, I became aware of the mounting scientific evidence of global warming in 1985, which upset me a lot at the time. I’m now accept it, for I’ve accepted the historical fact that we, as a species, are unable to deal with a thing while it is still nothing. Disaster has to take its toll before we become motivated enough to act. We all know the admonition; ‘don’t fix it if it ain’t broke‘

⁽³⁾ Some will say that belief is not addictive. Looking around me, I reckon that belief may actually be the most potent addiction around. Belief is closely tied to social/tribal identity. Belief defines the self, the ego. Belief causes people to go to war, to martyr themselves, to burn witches at the stake. Belief is powerful stuff, and alas, blind as a bat.