We live in a world where things are always pulling us in one direction or another, telling us to believe one thing or not believe another. Whether it's politics, religion, tradition, or just our brains contemplating the truth of something, it can seem overwhelming and burdensome to come to the correct conclusion about many claims when there are so many around us vying for our belief, and this isn't even taking into consideration the hectic and busy lives many individuals live as is. In such a hectic and already busy world where we have so many different things pulling us in so many directions, how do we practically have the time to know everything that is true, or everything that is false that we are told to believe?
I believe people can generally go in one of two opposite extremes with the previous question; they can either throw their hands in the air and not bother to care about most of the things they are told to believe, or they can believe everything they are told. The first extreme is unsatisfactory because people could be missing out on vital information that could improve their lives, or they could be setting themselves up to believe something dangerously false at a later point because they are never trained to think rationally and critically. The other extreme is unsatisfactory because someone who believes nearly everything they are told is like a boat being tossed to and fro by the waves with no direction whatsoever. My goal in this post is to give people some helpful guidelines for making rational conclusions toward subjects in their midst of their hectic and busy lives, so they can neither fall into serious and dangerous error in belief nor feel they have to be complacent and never know what they even truly believe about different important topics. The following are general guidelines and principals to help with rational thinking in the midst of a busy and hectic life.
The first guideline is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you are faced with a claim that is extraordinary in nature, if it defies everything we know about how the world and the universe works, for example the claim that a man walked on water or the claim that a man rose from the dead after being dead for three days, this claim should be held with extreme critical scrutiny because of the unlikelihood of it being true. The more far-fetched a claim is the more skeptical you should be of its truth, and the stronger evidence you should require for believing it.
KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid. Otherwise known as Occom's razor, this principal states that when choosing between multiple explanations for an event the most rational choice is the explanation that requires the fewest amount of assumptions. In other words, keep things simple and stick with the explanation that is most consistent with the known and proven data and requires the least amount of assumption in things that aren't proven or verifiable. An example would be the current debate about whether or not the election was rigged - it is a much simpler explanation that a wealthy multi-millionaire who has always gotten what he wants and has made clear he doesn't like losing is simply trying to do whatever he can to win the election or make himself and his supporters believe he did, versus having to assume somehow a person or a group of persons was able to pull of a widespread massive conspiracy theory which there is no evidence for, and that spanned multiple states and was so well performed that it fooled even Republican judges, the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice, and even some of the most staunch Trump supporters. When in doubt, go with the simples explanation.
You do not always have to have an answer. It is ok to sometimes say you simply don't know an explanation for something, or whether or not something is true. Sometimes the only option you may have is to simply withhold belief in a claim or explanation even if you don't know what the actual truth is. It is better to withhold belief than to believe something that is false. In this regard strive to be informed, not perfect in knowledge; perfect knowledge is impossible, no one can know everything that is everywhere 100% of the time. Even if you can't be everywhere all the time to know 100% that ghosts don't exist, you are still rationally justified in withholding belief in the claim that ghosts exist until you would be given convincing evidence that they do. Be ok with simply saying you don't hold to the belief in a claim even if you can't prove that the claim is false.
Pick your battles wisely. Some issues and claims just aren't worth fussing over. They are time wasters and they aren't issues that are going to have any kind of impact on your day to day living or even your long-term living. Knowing and understanding this can help keep you from getting caught up in these unnecessary webs that could stress you out mentally and/or emotionally.
No comments:
Post a Comment