I think the main problem is that any honest discussions about reality have very diminishing returns. One party simply has to deny logical, factual truth to still disagree and if they find reality unfavorable they will simply reject it. I believe there's a term for that, "Uncomfortable truth" fallacy or something such as.
Well indisputably there is some difference in brain state, else where comes the difference in expressed degree of disbelief. The important question is where are those differences? Are disbelievers brains being more or less emotionally driven when querried about their belief than nonbelievers for example? Or reflecting deeper on the issue? I tried to find any studies on that question, but you are right, no luck, clearly there is a lot more interest in believer vs non believer brains. So the only evidence we have is self reporting. Unreliable as it is. Personally, I'd say my transition from active disbelief to nonresisting nonbelief has less to do with how convinced i am and more to do with my changing values. As a recent deconvert, i still highly valued concpets of theology and god. As time passed, i no longer valued those things, even as the way i engaged with the topics became more scholarly and more emotionally detached. Because i no longer emotionally valued the topics, i no longer expressed an oppositional stance, merely an unconvinced one. In lieu of brainscans, hopefully my reflections on my experience provide some degree of insight
@SphericalCowPhysics "...there is some difference in brain state." I'd like some empirical evidence to support that claim, please, and thank you. Otherwise, I reject the concept as intrinsically incoherent for the 100+ reasons of my omnibus--all of which will eventually be presented in video form. "In lieu of brainscans, hopefully my relections on my experience will provide some degree of insight." I lend your appeal to personal anecdote the same degree of confidence as I lend to people's personal experiences with aliens, ghosts, Bigfoot, and their preferred deities; and for precisely the same reasons, no less. Self-reports are notoriously unreliable.
@@SphericalCowPhysics Sadly, yes. One need only consider the fact that I am explicitly irreligious and agnostic, and then view my playlist on How to Destroy Your Credibility in One Comment to see this recurring issue.
I think the main problem is that any honest discussions about reality have very diminishing returns. One party simply has to deny logical, factual truth to still disagree and if they find reality unfavorable they will simply reject it. I believe there's a term for that, "Uncomfortable truth" fallacy or something such as.
Well indisputably there is some difference in brain state, else where comes the difference in expressed degree of disbelief. The important question is where are those differences? Are disbelievers brains being more or less emotionally driven when querried about their belief than nonbelievers for example? Or reflecting deeper on the issue? I tried to find any studies on that question, but you are right, no luck, clearly there is a lot more interest in believer vs non believer brains. So the only evidence we have is self reporting. Unreliable as it is.
Personally, I'd say my transition from active disbelief to nonresisting nonbelief has less to do with how convinced i am and more to do with my changing values. As a recent deconvert, i still highly valued concpets of theology and god. As time passed, i no longer valued those things, even as the way i engaged with the topics became more scholarly and more emotionally detached. Because i no longer emotionally valued the topics, i no longer expressed an oppositional stance, merely an unconvinced one.
In lieu of brainscans, hopefully my reflections on my experience provide some degree of insight
@SphericalCowPhysics
"...there is some difference in brain state."
I'd like some empirical evidence to support that claim, please, and thank you. Otherwise, I reject the concept as intrinsically incoherent for the 100+ reasons of my omnibus--all of which will eventually be presented in video form.
"In lieu of brainscans, hopefully my relections on my experience will provide some degree of insight."
I lend your appeal to personal anecdote the same degree of confidence as I lend to people's personal experiences with aliens, ghosts, Bigfoot, and their preferred deities; and for precisely the same reasons, no less. Self-reports are notoriously unreliable.
Do you believe in a God?
@LuxMachaera
Demonstratrate that you are an intellectually honest interlocutor by steelmanning my actual position.
Alas, the youtube comment section. Where steel is as flimsy as straw ehh?
@@SphericalCowPhysics
Sadly, yes. One need only consider the fact that I am explicitly irreligious and agnostic, and then view my playlist on How to Destroy Your Credibility in One Comment to see this recurring issue.