False belief: how bad is it?

Post Reply New Topic

False beliefs are something that many people rail out against, and to some extent part of this is obvious and makes sense. Few people defend outright delusion or a solipsist psychology, although some people seem to come close: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.c ... gical.html , http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.c ... ms-to.html

The issue is that while outright delusion and extreme falsehood is bad, does it follow that all false beliefs are bad? Some thinkers suggest this is not the case:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... uperpowers
Tyler Cowen:
"Delusion is one secret to a good marriage. .. The couples who stay together are the delusional ones who look back on their pasts with rose-colored glasses. … Happily married couples also tend to believe that they have more in common with their partners than they really do. …

How many of use would enjoy hearing a two-hour debate – Oxford style with formal rules – on the relative prominence of our virtues and flaws? … If we wish to go through life as happy, productive people, those are exactly the kinds of doubts that need to be blocked from our conscious minds. …

Suppose we were offered the option of surgery, or a pill, to correct our self-deception. … Don’t take that pill. … The depressed, even though their thought processes are often quite rational, tend to have more accurate views about their real standing in the world. … It is a moot point whether depression causes a lack of self-deception or whether a lack of self-deception causes depression. Probably cause and effect run in both directions. In any case we really do need our self-deception.

People who feel good about themselves, whether or not the facts merit this judgment, tend to achieve more. … self-deception may be an evolved defense mechanism against worries, distractions, and a loss of focus. … Imagine walking around, knowing every minute what other people were thinking about us. Most of us would find this unbearable rather quickly. …

They key to doing well is to keep our self-deception as a general buffer, but to overcome it selectively for specific problems. … As a general principle, trying to puncture people’s delusions does not always make them better off. Often we switch into other, less easy-to-refute but more harmful delusions. " (all taken from Discover Your Inner Economist)

(Also mentioned in this paper by Tyler Cowen and Robin Hanson)
http://mercatus.org/uploadedFiles/Merca ... -%20WP.pdf (page 22, sorry, talks about the benefits of being biased with cited research on the matter)

And so, the question comes up: how bad is false belief?

It seems that false beliefs are necessary given that not believing isn't an option, and also given that finding the correct beliefs are generally impossible in our current state of being. It also seems that it is possible that a false belief can have benefits, even when finding a true belief given, or even when just living. Are false beliefs more tolerable from some people than others? If false beliefs must generally be opposed, then why so? If not, then why not? What are your thoughts on false beliefs? What are your thoughts on YOUR OWN false beliefs?

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 29 Jun 2010, 10:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

False belief should always be opposed in all situations regardless of consequences. Truth is the highest aim.

From the assertion of a falsehood anything follows logically. Ex Falsi Quodlibet.

ruveyn

Who's to say a belief is false? I disagree with the assertion that, just because it's widely opposed, it's false. No one knows for sure.

There are loads of religions, they can't all be true - perhaps none are. But the majority of the world's population dosen't rail against them, or against certain ones.

Who says solipsism isn't true? Do you have solid evidence for that?

I don't think the term "false belief" should be used. It's a flawed way of looking at things.

Solopsism cannot be falsified. Therefore it is nonsense.

ruveyn

The opposite can't be falsified either.

I would rather admit my ignorance and seek after truth than to just believe *something* simply because I must.



Having "correct beliefs" is more of a religious thing than simply searching for truth.



If one of my grandchildren believes it is safe to jump down from high up in a tree, why must I tell him or her the truth of the matter?

If one of my grandchildren believes he or she can topple a tree by climbing up and leaning to one side, must I tell him or her the truth of the matter?

In the face of the ignorance of their own childhood, just as in mine, I have at least made sure my grandchildren know "Gravity always wins" and that it takes a really strong wind to topple a tree.



I ponder what might yet be standing in the way of discovering more truth.

Last edited by leejosepho on 29 Jun 2010, 7:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

The proposition is inherently undecidable. So it can be safely ignored.

ruveyn

Not really. While it may be undecidable, it still dosen't take away from how interesting the theories are, and the very nature of undecidable problems is, of course, that there's no answer to them, so we still have no evidence that solipsism isn't true.

I had to go look that one up ... and now I must ask:

I knew nothing (as in "I was ignorant of") "solipsism" until just a few moments ago, and now "solipsism" would have me believe this recent modification within is related to something (itself) that does not actually exist?

There must be a conspiracy running somewhere ...

... but not within.

It's a philosophy that only one's self exists, as far as I know.

Yes, and it proves itself a falsehood if it exists.

Last edited by leejosepho on 29 Jun 2010, 10:21 am, edited 2 times in total.

Not only is the proposition unprovable, it is inherently unprovable. It is incapable of falsification. Since it cannot be resolved pro or con it can be safely ignored. It is just an utterance, a philosophical speculation having no practical import whatsoever. If the idea of solopsism had not occurred to anyone the world would still be what it is. It is in irrelevant matter. It has the sample practical import as the question of whether unicorns exist or not.

ruveyn

The same can be said of reality existing. It cannot be proven true or false, if all we see and know is through our own minds. Or, my own mind, if solipsism is real

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt130362.html

What if the consequence of false belief is truth?

"Scientists with unreasonably optimistic beliefs about their research projects may work harder and thus better advance scientific knowledge (Everett 2001; Kitcher 1990). Instead of simply agreeing with some standard position, people can better show off their independence and intelligence by inventing original positions and defending them." From page 22 of the Hanson and Cowen paper.

Even further, why is truth the highest aim above personal happiness, successful social relations, success, and the positive effects of self-confidence?