Humility (yes you can hear it)

I have decided to redo my last video in this format, due to the fact that I have been consistantly having problems with the volume of my voice. Plus, I wish I had a charming brittish accent and was well spoken.
Let a man dream, damnit.
Anywhoo...
I have no "holy book" I can cite. If I claim any type of authority it would only serve as an appeal to authority. The only tool I have is to appeal to reason, and if I falter in the least my words mean nothing.

Beliefs do not deserve respect. They should be questioned and challenged; nothing should be sacred in the pursuit of truth. However, people do deserve respect. My goal is not to convert, as it is not as much one's conclusions I disagree upon, but more so how they arrived at their conclusions. My goal is not to "destroy" someone's belief or to humiliate my opponent, even if my logic is flawless who will hear it? My objective is knowledge, which may lead to truth.

I will say this, however of truth. We can never say with certainty that which is true, all we can say with any amount of certainty is that which is not true. We merely eliminate possibilities. Even when relying upon empirical evidence, being by far the most useful form of evidence in my opinion, it relies upon observations through the senses of an invdividual, which have fundamental limitations, and even at the most basic level could be biased.

Everything is "tainted" by bias. Even in regarding personal experience one should understand one's own limitations.

Certainty is merely an illusion. My main contention with religion is "faith" which has two faulty components. First, it assumes beyond that which is necessary to assume. Secondly, looking at various definitions of "faith" one finds it implies a sense of certainty: "a strong belief without evidence," "confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing."

Shakespeare said "the fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool." Essentially, the more one learns the closer one is to comprehending how much available knowledge he/she does not posess. As we expand our knowledge, this sense of certainty will leave those who are intellectually honest.

Now, if I had but one suggestion that those who define themselves as "atheists" would listen to, I would present the concept of humility as a "virtue." I must point out I am describing more the philosophical concept as opposed to how the idea is presented in religion, (for instance, I do not see it as a synonym for being "meek"). I now delve into morality, which I think is somewhat subjective. I invite you to challenge this notion, and I would chide someone who accepts my words without doing so.

We have become arrogant you and I.... at times abrasive, and more importantly, we have become quite too certain for our own good. I am not a passive observer and stand guilty beside you. Look around you, many of us perpetuate the same "us vs. them" mentality we criticize religion for, we begin to develop the cognitive distortion of splitting, many of us display groupthink, and I will be the first to point to my own videos as evidence.... this has a measurable impact on the decision-making process. In essence, we become certain.

Not only can humility serve as a tool to help counter various cognitive biases (as humility begins with an intimate understanding of one's own limitations), but it counters arrogance (which can interfere with unbiased thought).

Along with this, humility also ties into this notion of "intellectual honesty" that I am always rambling about and attempting to achieve, as well as objectivity. Humility implies that one is "open." I believe that if one is intellectually honest, their beliefs are subject to change in light of new evidence.

Now, along with this, it also implies " to respect." I have no cognitve biases I can counter here, I can give you no such reason to think this a "good" or "positive" thing. The best definition I can find to describe respect's relation to humility is: "to show regard or consideration for."

If nothing else, if you find contentment in "converting" someone.. essentially attempting to make others draw the same conclusions you do, do you not think our usual methods quite unsucessful? Humility is not aggresive, it does not intimidate.

It is much easier to persuade people if you use polite arguments than to be confrontational.

Either way, is nothing more appropriate to propose to us collectively as a "virtue" than humility?

Category:

Education

Tags:

• atheism
• god
• religion
• jesus
• bible
• humility
• cognitive bias
• belief
• truth
• Can
• You
• Think
• You Can
• Peace
• Dance
• Mobile Device
• Canada
• Hear
• Stop
• Can Dance
• Touch
• Think You

[lachezar43]

I don't understand how this man's videos do not have thousands of viewers....

[julzabro]

"This final "layer" to religion we typically see in extreme/radical/fundamentalist­­/etc varieties of any given religion is by far the most harmful." I like 2 debate with this type of Theist 4 that very reason...they are the most harmful. I must admit, it does seem like a brick wall and I do question my own sanity but the hope is that maybe something will make them think. I really enjoyed ur video and our convo....keep in touch! ;)

[naejimba]

(cont 4) There is quite a difference between the two (and luckily in my experience, such a degree of certainty is not the majority). The latter I admit is a bit different, and such a person I doubt you could change their mind. Lots of good points.

[naejimba]

(cont 3) not having to consider the argument being made. This final "layer" to religion we typically see in extreme/radical/fundamentalist­/etc varieties of any given religion is by far the most harmful. Denial is a common theme; literally allowing someone to maintain a belief they have an emotionally vested interest in, in spite of even overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (cont 4)

[naejimba]

(cont 3) not having to consider the argument being made. This final "layer" to religion we typically see in extreme/radical/fundamentalist­/etc varieties of any given religion is by far the most harmful. Denial is a common theme; literally allowing someone to maintain a belief they have an emotionally vested interest in, in spite of even overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (cont 4)

[naejimba]

(cont 3) not having to consider the argument being made. This final "layer" to religion we typically see in extreme/radical/fundamentalist­/etc varieties of any given religion is by far the most harmful. Denial is a common theme; literally allowing someone to maintain a belief they have an emotionally vested interest in, in spite of even overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (cont 4)

[naejimba]

(cont 2) the answer to every "tough" question was simply to have more faith (asking you to be even more certain about the thing you are having doubts about since there is no evidence to support it, and it is highly improbable). Unfortunately, the kind of theists you say you like debating are almost certain to be emotionally attatched to their position, all of the examples you mentioned (satanist, heathen, fool) are ways in which this particular brand of theist justifies (cont 3)

[naejimba]

(cont 2) the answer to every "tough" question was simply to have more faith (asking you to be even more certain about the thing you are having doubts about since there is no evidence to support it, and it is highly improbable). Unfortunately, the kind of theists you say you like debating are almost certain to be emotionally attatched to their position, all of the examples you mentioned (satanist, heathen, fool) are ways in which this particular brand of theist justifies (cont 3)

[naejimba]

(cont 2) the answer to every "tough" question was simply to have more faith (asking you to be even more certain about the thing you are having doubts about since there is no evidence to support it, and it is highly improbable). Unfortunately, the kind of theists you say you like debating are almost certain to be emotionally attatched to their position, all of the examples you mentioned (satanist, heathen, fool) are ways in which this particular brand of theist justifies (cont 3)

[naejimba]

(cont 2) the answer to every "tough" question was simply to have more faith (asking you to be even more certain about the thing you are having doubts about since there is no evidence to support it, and it is highly improbable). Unfortunately, the kind of theists you say you like debating are almost certain to be emotionally attatched to their position, all of the examples you mentioned (satanist, heathen, fool) are ways in which this particular brand of theist justifies (cont 3)