"believe,"
from P.Gmc. *ga-laubjan "to believe," perhaps lit.
"hold dear, love" (cf. O.S. gilobian "believe,"
Du. geloven, O.H.G. gilouben, Ger. glauben), ultimately a
compound based on PIE *leubh- "to care, desire, love"
A recent discussion about
belief, faith, and science got me thinking.
As I went off to bed I thought about an article I read that challenged one of my beliefs (a belief that I rarely
think about and so accept as a truth) The article asked me if I thought it ‘ok’
if a brother and sister married if they were unable to have children.
The incest taboo is a fascinating one – without going into deep
detail it is a universal phenomenon – all cultures has some form of restriction
on intermarriage. Obviously there are
exceptions and variations but it is a very very strong cultural component. There is empirical evidence that this is
biologically based – after all the
children of incest would tend to die sooner and so those who are
psychologically inclined against it would
survive and that trait would be reinforced. But the taboo really relates to passing along
genes. So if a couple said – ok, we will get sterilized then is such a marriage
more acceptable, more palatable? I mean
think about this – marrying your brother or sister – if that were typical would
that make you (especially women) feel more vulnerable around your own family?
Would it change the perception of the family unit? Of the sense of ‘safety’ of
a brother ? Many women say that they find having a male homosexual friend a
great experience because they don’t feel the confusion of sexuality but can
gain insight into a male perspective – so this freedom from sexual relations is
certainly a part of this taboo. I was
very angry when Woody Allen married his adopted daughter – to me he broke a sacred trust – and I have since then never
seen another Woody Allen movie, nor even rented one. I understand that he is happy in his marriage
and I have no desire to see him punished or in jail - but I found it a very disturbing action because of the implications for adopted
girls.
Now lets say this brother and sister lied and didn’t get
sterilized – and they decided to have a child. Is that then a crime? They
cannot be stopped –so what how do we as a society address this – their belief
is that there is no harm done, no foul.
They have a good solid loving marriage.
But there is strong scientific evidence to say that this is something to
be discouraged as society. Is the belief
legitimate? Is it only legit if you have children? Does the science rule over
the belief?
Beliefs are very important -
they impact the way we relate to the world, to society, the way we see
ourselves, how we justify our existence and behaviors. They form us, inform us,
shape outcomes and behaviors and as such deeply deeply held. Take two people
who have similar lives and if one believes they are smart, successful and
capable and the other believes that they are mediocre and plain – and you be surprised
by the fact that those beliefs literally change the way they live and experience
life. The impacts of beliefs included
belief in God, in science, in anything. Beliefs
make truth –they determine how we
will see the world, including how
we interpret the world – and how the world will see us.
Science is a tough business – we like to think it is totally
empirical but it is not necessarily. One
cannot approach science with the idea of
proving right or wrong, of winning or losing – one must approach science with a
mind of inquiry. However this is harder
than it seems – science is filled
with folks who lie or misread results
because they are so committed to an outcome.
The same mind that developed the hypothesis may have a hard time to test
it. I have done IT QA for years – and I know many brilliant developers who create poor quality software because they
cannot escape their belief about what people need or
want or that what they built is correct.
The only way I have seen beliefs change is through 1) trauma or
some major event or 2) over a period of time from exposure and
experiences. The later process only works however only if there is enough
incentive to change a belief, if there is skin in the game. For example; The PRESIDENT of Harvard in 2005 (yes, 2005)
came out and said that women are just biologically less inclined for math and
science. This, as you might imagine set off a storm of responses. Now the president, Summers, could point to
all sorts of empirical evidence – lower math scores, SAT scores, fewer women in
these fields, fewer applying to schools with math science departments, even
neurological studies. I am sure he could also point out few women in the
finance industry, and even drag friends into it demonstrating that in most
households he knows the man is the one who does the finances while women are
better at housekeeping. Summer’s
inherent belief drives the way her interprets data – and even if he changes his
position politically I doubt his inner conviction would be altered.
UNLESS. Perhaps if he was required to do the following it might
have an impact. If he was told that his salary and tenure would be dependent on
his setting up two math programs – one designed only for boys and another only
for girls and that the scores on a final exam must be comparable for him to get
tenure and receive his pay. So he sets up these programs and in the process
initially finds the girls are not doing as well – so he changes things for the
girls, allows them to work in groups, use colored pencils, more word and
conceptual problems and provides a series of inspirational and sexy role model women in math who come in to talk with them –
and then he discovers that the girls out perform the boys. But still not believing he does it again the
next year – giving the boys some special attention to balance it out – and the girls still out
perform the boys. And perhaps over time, with more exposure to women in
math, and different educational and socialization programs he discovers that
the system is why and not some biological ‘fact’. Or maybe not.
That’s the thing here – a change
in belief structure is very very hard to accomplish. But change will NOT occur
simply because someone debates it with him. Even if he pleads mea culpa – what he
thinks ain’t changing.
This is why I do not often spend a lot of time arguing with people
who are deeply committed to the right or a conservative view – I do not think
logic, reason, or any form of persuasion will change their belief. I do not
debate views on the existence of God. I
do not think that you can change anyone – people only change themselves and
they must be impelled. I have made significant changes in my own view but only
after major life experiences – I have often said that I am so stubborn the
fates had to hit me over the head with a two by four SEVERAL times to get me to
pay attention. I focus on the people who
are on the fence, who are unclear. I
also think how we raise and treat our children matters – they are still
forming. I did not tell my daughter what to think (at least not too
often) but I did tell her TO
think, to ask, to question. She and her
friends and I have had many a compelling discussion – and we sometimes disagree.
For example - They do not see themselves
as feminists – in part because they grew up with access and freedoms that my peers fought for so for them these
are ‘givens’. But as they get older they
are discovering some of the issues of male dominance – though I would say they
still stay away from calling themselves feminists. We disagree about several things – but inherently I value and respect that they THINK, they
inquire and they use the data and their own life experience and they make me
think.
Interestingly belief is one of the hard aspects of advocating for
people with cognitive disabilities. I can tell folks ‘facts’ all I want. I can
give them statistics and stories and they nod their heads – but they do not change their beliefs, not really.
They believe that if a person looks well, is articulate, has knowledge, and is
able bodied then the only reason they are not working successfully is that they
are not trying. They think wanting to be motivated is the same thing as being
motivated. It is afterall just a
question of effort. But when it comes to
TBI all bets are off – it’s a crazy house world where the observer and the
observed are different – and one may WANT to be motivated but one’s motivation
machine is busted – the want and the act
become separate. Since this cannot be empirically shown, and since we have a strong belief system in America about
character equaling effort individuals
with brain injury (or other cognitive disabilities) are often seen as morally
bankrupt. We hold similar beliefs about
drug addicts and psychologically challenged individuals. These beliefs are intrinsic in the way we
view the world – and it is VERY hard to give them up or alter them.
We NEED belief, we NEED faith – and we NEED science and inquiry –
we are wired to define ourselves through these system and without them we have
no beliefs. In Hindu (I believe)
philosophy there are certain traits which are ‘stains’ (I do not know the correct spelling of the
Yoga word) that is they cannot be
removed from our existence These
stains are what give us trouble - but
they can aslo lead to good things. Some
examples are ignorance, ego and passion. Perhaps passion can also be considered
a belief – the thing we cling to which can cause such grief – yet we still find
it hard to let go.
Platonic thought suggests that there are inherent a priori forms
that exist, ultimate truths. We want there to be ‘truths’ since we aim in the direction
of truth but what if there are none, what is everything just is what we
believe? Then it’s the journey or process and not the destination.
I must have some beliefs in order to structure and shape my world
but I must also practice at giving them up, at altering them to accommodate new
data, new facts or new perspectives. I also must practice graciousness with beliefs
I do not hold and sometimes this is a real challenge because it feels
threatening to MY beliefs. This is often
what is behind the failures to communicate; our belief structures have no
points of intersection. Finding common
ground often seems impossible yet I have
seen that it is possible, even if the common ground is to agree to disagree.
Faith, believe, trust. Big words, hard to change. But enlightenment always begins at home, in
our own heart. Isn’t that what Dorothy
learned?
