p.s. to some, the light at the end of the tunnel is that from an oncoming train! doh!

You have chosen to be a ship. I choose to remain a captain.

The light might just be a next-plane-of-existence bug-zapper, too. Approach cautiously.

Cavallo,
Our remaining difference seems to lie in whether someone consciously or unconsciously rejects "facts" they are faced with.

We are not purely logical creatures. There are many reasons for one's beliefs not to change despite "evidence" to the contrary, to name a few:

-insecurity
-comfort supplied by existing beliefs
-low intelligence
-ego
-desire for acceptance by one's social group
-incorrect interpretation of the "facts"
-narrow range of life experiences
-a traumatic past experience

Our intelligence, self-awareness, and emotional capacity roll up to make a complex, full-bodied smoke. This is what the field of psychology is all about, and none of its "experts" have any idea what's going on in there.

A diehard bigot working next to your same exemplary black co-worker might merely conclude that "this one's REALLY sneaky, I can't catch him at it". That's not a conscious choice, but rather the way his nature and nurture misguide his interpretation of what he sees.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see". That blindness is not voluntary.

Someone who is intelligent, curious, open-minded, and has a minimum of mental baggage is a likelier candidate for belief changes. He still isn't choosing them.

We humans are egotistical by nature and like to think we're in control, hence our telling ourselves that we choose everything. Comforting thought, but that doesn't make it true.

Cigarick,

In this narrow context, I suppose we ARE vessels of sorts.

I didn't even CHOOSE not to deceive myself about it.

coda: wow. GREAT reply! after giving it some more thought, i pretty much arrived at the exact same conclusions, especially about the reasons why, when presented with a fact that would LOGICALLY over-ride previous beliefs, someone might "choose" to keep the old belief.

and i agree with you. to the extent that other factors come into play with at least (if not more) "pull" than logic, such "choice" is most likely not at all a conscious thing. therefore, the person is likely NOT capable of making a choice. boils down to something like "you can't choose something if you're not aware that you CAN choose it."

i would further that along by adding that life is rarely so black and white that a choice comes without many, many strings attached. and those strings can be the "stuff" of one's very being sometimes. the strings can be attached to one's perception of soul, of duty, of honor, of obligation, of rightness or wrongness, etc.

so i think we really are in agreement basically.

however... 🙂

you wrote: "Someone who is intelligent, curious, open-minded, and has a minimum of mental baggage is a likelier candidate for belief changes. He still isn't choosing them."

i agree with everything here except for that last sentence, and even there it's more an issue of semantics than anything. i would say "he still MAY NOT be choosing them." i'd even go so far as to say "he still MOST LIKELY IS NOT choosing them." 🙂

it's just that niggling matter of absolutes that trips me up on that. being someone who was, indeed, raised to be a racist, i'm also someone who did, indeed, change my beliefs as i got out of the neighborhood in which i was raised and got to interact with non-white people outside of that environment -- and it was a neighborhood where there was a perpetual cycle of race-based violence; some whites would jump a black guy; some blacks would get revenge and jump a white guy, repeat ad infinitum -- it still goes on there to this day, sadly.

anyway, maybe we could meet in the middle and say that your assertation is the rule but agree that there are exceptions to the rule? 🙂

thanks much for this "mental volleyball" today! much appreciated!

-sicilian tony

Cavallo,
"anyway, maybe we could meet in the middle and say that your assertation is the rule but agree that there are exceptions to the rule? 🙂 "

No. 8{)
But my head really hurts after all this, and I'm willing agree to a draw. Looking forward to a rematch at a later date.

coda and Cavallo

excuse me for listening in, but is was a pleasant joy to hear different view points discussed by two people that are able to debate in a civilized manner.

thanks, rick! and thank you, coda. rematch it is (and my head hurts too; thunderstorm coming in). 😛

yeah, i know, it's some geek thing in me, but i really enjoy a thoughtful, civil debate. i have opinions that i'm passionate about, but not one is worth holding if i can't defend it. and if thoughts never challenged, then they tend to turn to stone and rhetoric, never to grow or expand.

thanks for the thought provoking posts.

You're scaring me. It almost sounds like you're one step away from, "It's not MY fault--I'm a product of my environment!" Isn't that the national disease?

cigarick: to an extent, it IS true that we are products of our environments. that's not just for our negative traits, but for our positive as well.

i do think that there is a goodly amount of our "personhood" that is a result of our total experiences in life. for instance, if you grow up in a neighborhood where every single person smokes pot, you're going to "absorb" that there's nothing wrong with pot smoking. when someone comes into your neighborhood and says "this is wrong!" you're going to be incredibly defensive, because hey -- you've never heard of someone NOT smoking it. so smoking has become "the norm" for you. it's only when you have had the opportunity to go beyond that neighborhood and see that it is NOT, in fact, the norm for all people that you'll even have the capacity to change your beliefs.

that said, most folks dig up the notion that we are all products of nature and nurture. i'd add another aspect to the mix and say that we are also products of our free will. i grew up in a neighborhood full of gang violence, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, etc. -- instead of becoming another buzzed out criminal, though, i got out of the neighborhood and worked in law enforcement. i don't believe for one second that i was "doomed" to be like those around me when i was growing up.

on the other hand, me and a friend of mine were the ONLY two people who, by the time we reached adulthood were not abusing drugs or alcohol or had done time in jail. out of about 40 or so of us who had grown up together, that's a pretty shocking statistic.

the one difference i can see between us and those we grew up with is that both he and i had dreams that extended beyond our neighborhood -- and we were both prolific readers.

i do think that people tend to "go with what'cha know." at the same time, i KNOW that we're not doomed to ONLY be what we've seen firsthand.

Cigarick,

"You're scaring me. It almost sounds like you're one step away from, "It's not MY fault--I'm a product of my environment!" Isn't that the national disease? "

That's a good point, one which made me think a while. I didn't realize we were that close to thin ice.

But, yes, we are products of our environments. Everything that has happened to us from conception to present had some effect on us, helped shaped us and form our thoughts and opinions, helped or hindered by our conscious choices and aspirations.

Is that an excuse for improper behavior? No. It may be a reason, but not an excuse.

Nor is this concept any sort of determinism or fate. Sure, we're dealt a hand of cards in the beginning; then, within the limits of our drives and abilities we discard, draw, discard and draw for the rest of our lives trying to make the best hand we can.

"National disease" is an appropriate term. I doubt any other society on this planet credits that sort of bunk. Well, maybe France.

Nature has its ways of "encouraging" appropriate behavior in animal societies. Noncomformists are eaten, or at least are not allowed to pass on these traits. We humans have moved ourselves a bit outside the natural element, so societies have developed fairly well-defined and accessible sets of rules for behavior and the repercussions for not observing them. These cover bad manners to mass murder.

If the rules developed for the benefit of our society are not being enforced, it is that society's failing. (How it happened and Whom to blame it on is for another discussion.)

sicilian tony motto #3: "there are a thousand reasons but not one excuse." (used to tell my cops this when one, usually a rookie, did the "but, captain, but captain..." routine). 🙂