Conversation

A lot of beliefs we have are "load-bearing" - for example, some Christians think they have to believe in God in order to have a sense of morality. "If I lose my faith, what's to stop me from being a bad person?" So they never truly consider changing their beliefs, because the-
12
226
implications are too horrible. Their evaluation of reality isn't based on data or reasoning - it's influenced by the imagined bad consequences of changing their mind. Another example is that someone might refuse to acknowledge that black people tend to do worse in school, cause -
3
71
the implication might be that black people are dumb, and the idea that mental quality might correspond with race is horrifying. But I truly believe that the truth will always save you, even if it's scary and even if you can't see how. Yes, it's scary to believe that -
1
68
losing your faith will also destroy your moral compass, or that black people being bad at school will mean they're dumb, but if you actually accept the truth then you might find that you still want to do good things after becoming atheist, or that black school scores-
2
52
are actually causes by poverty and discrimination. A lot of the people who get horrified at topics I probe are horrified because I'm challenging a core belief that they need to hold to be okay with themselves. But it'll be all right, I promise. Horrible implications just mean-
1
86
the topic hasn't been fully understood yet. For example, your horror at IQ possibly corresponding with race means that maybe you value people with IQ less, or view them as disposable. Maybe that's actually the issue here - in a world where we respected and cared for everyone-
9
111
Replying to
For you, is there no room here for empirical disagreement? Or is that always preemptively trapped in this kind of counter-moralizing you offer? I agree that it’s better to know the truth, even if offends us, but your points don’t feel airtight enough to warrant these assumptions.
2
3
Replying to
Individualism is the solution to all of these problems. We figured that out some time ago, and we’re apparently intent on discarding the notion that the individual is the most important entity. Averages and statistics are irrelevant when you treat people as individuals.
1
2
Replying to
Agreed; I generally think general statistics are useful when dealing with general sizes; it becomes only usefully predictive in absence of other evidence when dealing with individuals
1
1
Show replies
Replying to
1stly- bad take on Christianity. Happy to teach what christians actually believe about right & wrong. Would be terrible to continue to poorly represent what christians believe. 2ndly- how do you scientifically prove good and moral? On what authority do you claim moral good/bad.
1
Show replies
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Sure, I'm not arguing it's not complicated, only that we should walk straight into the evidence, whatever it is, and trust that it'll be okay.
1
5
Show replies