opposites attract
I'm not saying that he and I are unsuited, just that we are different. I firmly adhere to knowledge, science and logic; he is relaxed about such things to the point of disregarding them - he thinks it's another form of brainwashing. I like my world ordered and I like to be in control; he wants consciousness expansion. I read text books on the psychology of perception and reality; he spent his formative years poring over Carlos Castaneda.

This dichotomy leads to an interesting tension. The arguments start small - views ventured over a cup of tea where we each get indignant with the other - but they grow, and sometimes they rankle. How can he say that invisible beings surround us? Likewise, I see him look at me as if I am the alien creature when I tell him that science works.

"Haven't you heard of Occam's Razor?" I challenge and, pushing his long hair back from the month's worth of beard on his lovely face, I know I have erred in mentioning any razor at all.

He sparks up a joint. "You're so... closed-minded!" he scolds, exasperated.

Later, as we lie wrapped in the tangled sheets, he tells me about astral projection. I consider that maybe sometimes we are talking about the same thing using different vocabulary. I want his ideas to be true for him. It's just that for me, the supernatural is not a part of existence in which I wish to indulge because it doesn't carry the neatness of proof. I can't believe in what he says. I just can't.

"I bet I astrally project farther than you tonight," I murmur as I fall asleep. At this, he moves his body away from me slightly and I think that someday it isn't going to be enough that we tolerate each other's opinions.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:21, 32 replies)

If there is any hope for love!
Please let you two be the proof! It's like Dr Cox and Jordan on 'Scrubs' - THAT is a healthy relationship!
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:29, closed)

I really like this story
it's very touching.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:31, closed)

It's all so...
complicated. meh.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:34, closed)

All science relies on the 5 senses...
So what about the other senses that we have no access to? (or very little access)

Its harder to proove things dont exist than exist. For instance, its very difficult to scientifically prove that there is no such things as ghosts.
(Miggyman, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:35, closed)

It's only complicated if you insist on being right all the time
especially if you insist on proving him wrong. If you're so sure, you're right, then you do not require his validation and vice versa.
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:36, closed)

eh
@Miggyman - what other senses? Also, this is going to go down the road where I argue that the burden of proof is not on me to prove something is non-existent.

@baz - the complications are plentiful, but regarding his world view vs. mine, I want to be able to respect his world view but that's so hard because it seems so ludicrous to me. (He doesn't respect mine either, so you're right - we're fairly even.)
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:40, closed)

There is room for both
in one brain, even. I have a Master's degree in Physics and have experienced assorted tracts on Chinese mysticism in a tangible way.

I do tend to ascribe to them physical explanations, however. None of that chi nonsense.
(ThomsonsPier consumes, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:41, closed)

Respecting his world view is irrelevant
What you must respect is his right to it. Consider spending some time with the insane and check out their world view.
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:42, closed)

@baz
I've said this before: there is no right to belief or worldview or anything like that. Were there, you'd wrong someone by correcting them, and that's absurd.

If you have a belief that's false, then you're obliged to ditch it on pain of irrationality.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:45, closed)

@ Enzyme
Who says I've no right to a worldview?

I don't understand.
(happylittletulip helpless and delicious, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:48, closed)

@Enzyme
People are irrational.
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:48, closed)

@Enzyme
thats a really interesting argument, i'd not thought of it. My gut feeling is that it's wrong somehow, why can't you be free to believe what you want no matter how stupid?

That's a genuine question by the way.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:50, closed)

@Miggy
xxx All science relies on the 5 senses...
xxx So what about the other senses that we have
xxx no access to? (or very little access)

We have senses that we can't sense!?

I know, perhaps we could call them "non-senses".
(haberman is singing in the changes, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:54, closed)

@HLT
What he means is that although you can think what you want, you have no inalienable human right to it.

An inalienable human right is like food, or water. You commit a crime against a person by removing it from that person.

You can't have an inalienable human right to belief because you do have a duty to respect other peoples' opinions, which may contradict yours. Therefore your beliefs cannot be inalienable because by expressing a different opinion, they would commit a crime against you.

Not terribly well explained, maybe, but that's what I think he's getting at.
( Kroney, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:57, closed)

Right to believe
Well, the thought goes something like this: that in believing p, I implicitly think that it's true. (It's hard to make sense of the alternative.) If it turns out not to be true, then not only do I have no reson to believe it - I have in addition a reason not to. Hence to continue to believe it would be irrational.

As for a right to believe - well, that follows from the above. If I believe that p, and someone demonstrates the falsity, it's hard to see how I could plausibly claim that, that demonstration notwithstanding, I'm still going to continue to believe p.

What it boils down to is a basic claim that we have an obligation to believe all and only true things...
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 15:58, closed)

Aaaah
I think Kroney's answer made more sense to my brain.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:00, closed)

The right is implied
because if you dont respect other peoples right to their irrational opinion, we have all out monkey with a stick warfare and we wipe ourselves out completely.
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:00, closed)

@Kroney
No - you don't have any duty to respect anyone else's belief. If you believe that your skeleton is made of oak - even sincerely - I'm under no obligation to shrug. Respect for persons I can accept: respect for what they happen to have going on in their minds is entirely different.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:00, closed)

@Enzyme
I said opinion, in that context, not belief. What I meant there is that you have a duty to respect that person's right to express their opinion. Not to respect the opinion itself.
( Kroney, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:02, closed)

i thought
my skeleton was made of oak when i got on the fucking unforgiving scales this morning *grumbles about pizzafest last night*
( rachelswipe with a fork, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:02, closed)

@Enzyme
You make perfect sense. It's just not applicable to the real world. Imagine I show up at your gaf and insist I'm made of wood. You say, "I respect your right to think that but now i must prove you wrong". I say, "Do and I'll kick your fucking face in". What good is rationale then?

This is just an illustration, not a threat.
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:03, closed)

@Kroney
I'm not sure I'd even go that far. Only part of this is because I'm not happy with any kind of rights talk at all. (It doesn't make metaphysical sense to me.)

It's something I want to do some work on in future - but even allowing that there is a prima facie right to free expression, that presupposes an account of what that freedom is. And I think that that's lacking in a lot of the rights-talk I've seen. People being far too keen to make a vaguely political point and forgetting that they need to do a bit more metaphysics first... grrr...
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:05, closed)

@baz
Well, I wouldn't say that I respected your right to any opinion... certainly not that one.


The fact that I'd be unwilling to put you right tells us nothing about your entitlements to believe stuff. I'm just a wimp with little patience...
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:08, closed)

Right
Having read all of the above, I am pretty sure that I believe I am rather stupid.

Respect me!
(happylittletulip helpless and delicious, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:10, closed)

*respects hlt*

Oh sorry, I've confused respecting with "rubbing up against" haven't I.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:11, closed)

@Enzyme
Dude, no harm intended, I'm merely illustrating a point about people being irrational.

I'm saying people respect each others irrational opinions all the time just so as they can get along. Doesn't your mate Dawkins talk about tribe survival instinct explaining why people take care of/put up with each other?


EDIT: respects bonkers cake lady
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:12, closed)

@baz
Oh, yeah - for sure. There may be reasons to put up with all kinds of nincompoopery, and corresponding explanations for why we do. Doesn't mean that there's any duty to put up with it, though, or right to be a nincompoop.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:15, closed)

@enzyme
glad we agree - duty doesnt come into it just common sense. If CHCB cant get enough of a grip to realise when she's onto a good thing, well then she's hopeless and will die alone :)
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:16, closed)

*slightly bitter laugh*
CHCB knows precisely when she's onto a good thing. How 'bout you, Enzyme?
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:20, closed)

@baz
In fairness to CHCB, I don't think that there's any failure to appreciate her situation...


EDIT: STOP IT WITH THE MINDPISS, DR CEILIDHBAND!


*makes clear that he does not, has never, and will never, astrally project*
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:20, closed)

@chcb, Enzyme
cheers!
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 16:27, closed)

CHCB
You must write more.

You have a good writing style...meaty.


Write more.
( chickenlady b3ta's very own Elizabeth Taylor, Fri 4 Jul 2008, 17:50, closed)