Arguing against irrational beliefs is futile, says experimental psychologist

jay gw · 15th October 2006, 03:24 PM

The battle by scientists against "irrational" beliefs such as creationism is ultimately futile, a leading experimental psychologist said today.

The work of Bruce Hood, a professor at Bristol University, suggests that magical and supernatural beliefs are hardwired into our brains from birth, and that religions are therefore tapping into a powerful psychological force.

"I think it is pointless to think that we can get people to abandon their belief systems because they are operating at such a fundamental level," said Prof Hood. "No amount of rational evidence is going to be taken on board to get people to abandon those ideas."

He told the annual British Association Festival of Science in Norwich that the standard bearers for evolution, such as the biologist Richard Dawkins and the philosopher Daniel Dennet, had adopted a counterproductive and "simplistic" position.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/S...864753,00.html

Level · 15th October 2006, 04:09 PM

How does he explain all the Christians turned atheists? Not true believers from the start?

Dave1001 · 15th October 2006, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Level

How does he explain all the Christians turned atheists? Not true believers from the start?

Yes. And generationally, it could be explained by something like the Flyn effect.

Level · 15th October 2006, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by Dave1001

Yes. And generationally, it could be explained by something like the Flyn effect.

After reading and participating in countless I.D., God, and other superstitious debates online, I find myself agreeing with Prof. Hood...

Are there any other studies in this same vein?

Kopji · 15th October 2006, 05:45 PM

I'm a little confused by his conclusions.

If people were taught to have sentimental or adverse reactions to certain artifacts, why can't people be taught to have similar feelings about say, atheism or science? Somewhere there has developed the idea that people choose 'religion' or 'spirituality' by feelings, but feelings have no part in choices like atheism or disbelief.

His argument does not make much sense if feelings are allowed as part of being human.

saizai · 15th October 2006, 07:00 PM

IMO the (his or the reporter's?) conclusions are way too strong for the data to support.

All he has shown is that some people have a very strong associational emotional response. This does not fully support the conclusion that "it is not possible to convince someone to abandon irrational beliefs".

The implication of the conclusion is that it is impossible to doubt (or reject conclusions based upon) your own emotions without rejecting or not having the emotions themselves, which is patently false.

I less than three logic · 15th October 2006, 07:06 PM

Think we can send in the Light Created Life thread? With that they should have no problem proving beyond any doubt that it is in fact futile.

andyandy · 16th October 2006, 02:14 AM

the same article discussed in SMMT here......

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...tional+beliefs

Dancing David · 16th October 2006, 08:46 AM

I wouldn't put much faith in the article this is the ONLY experimental evidence that it cites.

Quote:

Another experiment involves asking subjects to cut up a photograph. When his team then measures their galvanic skin response - ie sweat production, which is what lie-detector tests monitors - there is a jump in the reading. This does not occur when a person destroys an object of less sentimental significance.

So he basicaly is using his philosophy to say that people should not teach science and that dawkins approach is counter productive.

Sounds like he is an apologist.

Gord_in_Toronto · 16th October 2006, 06:52 PM

One of the iconic books of my youth was Eric Hoffer's The True Believer. One of his theses is that some people have a "will to believe" and that they can be turned from one strong belief to a competely contary one quite rapidly. To illustrate this he quotes Goebbels about how Communists could be converted into the "best" Nazis.

I believe it was Jean Sheppard who popularized the saying, "Beware the True Believers. They are the worst kind."

Elizabeth I · 16th October 2006, 07:14 PM

Experimental psychologist? Don't those guys just run rats through mazes?

Glen.Nogami · 17th October 2006, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

One of the iconic books of my youth was Eric Hoffer's The True Believer. One of his theses is that some people have a "will to believe" and that they can be turned from one strong belief to a competely contary one quite rapidly. To illustrate this he quotes Goebbels about how Communists could be converted into the "best" Nazis.

I believe it was Jean Sheppard who popularized the saying, "Beware the True Believers. They are the worst kind."

Maybe the issue there is something in the brain wired for strong conviction or some neurotransmitter that enables it? Wouldn't that be great? Medications for excessive belief. If you or someone you know is suffering from irrational convictions, please, talk to your doctor about Rationaloft.

15th October 2006, 03:24 PM	#1
jay gw Suspended Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1,824	Arguing against irrational beliefs is futile, says experimental psychologist The battle by scientists against "irrational" beliefs such as creationism is ultimately futile, a leading experimental psychologist said today. The work of Bruce Hood, a professor at Bristol University, suggests that magical and supernatural beliefs are hardwired into our brains from birth, and that religions are therefore tapping into a powerful psychological force. "I think it is pointless to think that we can get people to abandon their belief systems because they are operating at such a fundamental level," said Prof Hood. "No amount of rational evidence is going to be taken on board to get people to abandon those ideas." He told the annual British Association Festival of Science in Norwich that the standard bearers for evolution, such as the biologist Richard Dawkins and the philosopher Daniel Dennet, had adopted a counterproductive and "simplistic" position. http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/S...864753,00.html
jay gw Suspended Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1,824

15th October 2006, 04:32 PM	#3
Dave1001 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,717	Originally Posted by Level How does he explain all the Christians turned atheists? Not true believers from the start? Yes. And generationally, it could be explained by something like the Flyn effect.
Dave1001 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,717	__________________ I'm here to discuss ideas, not to get personal. I won't criticize you personally, please don't criticize me personally. I won't direct ad hominems at you, please don't direct ad hominems at me. I won't attack you or put you down, please don't attack me or put me down. Thanks.

15th October 2006, 07:00 PM	#6
saizai Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,374	IMO the (his or the reporter's?) conclusions are way too strong for the data to support. All he has shown is that some people have a very strong associational emotional response. This does not fully support the conclusion that "it is not possible to convince someone to abandon irrational beliefs". The implication of the conclusion is that it is impossible to doubt (or reject conclusions based upon) your own emotions without rejecting or not having the emotions themselves, which is patently false.
saizai Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,374	__________________ Friendly advice: if in an argument with me, don't make tons of fallacies or you'll just embarass yourself when I call you on 'em. Kthx! See my Youtube videos for more good argument, as well as bits about my various other interests, like ASL, cogsci, neurosci, meditation, cooking, etc.

15th October 2006, 07:06 PM	#7
I less than three logic Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: St Cloud, MN, USA Posts: 1,464	Think we can send in the Light Created Life thread? With that they should have no problem proving beyond any doubt that it is in fact futile.
	__________________ “There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world.” - Carl Sagan “The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well, on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball ninety million miles away and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.” – Douglas Adams

16th October 2006, 02:14 AM	#8
andyandy anthropomorphic ape Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: up a tree Posts: 8,192	the same article discussed in SMMT here...... http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...tional+beliefs
	__________________ "Contentment is found in the music of Bach, the books of Tolstoy and the equations of Dirac, not at the wheel of a BMW or the aisles of Harvey Nicks."

15th October 2006, 04:09 PM	#2
Level Scholar Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 51	How does he explain all the Christians turned atheists? Not true believers from the start?

15th October 2006, 05:16 PM	#4
Level Scholar Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 51	Originally Posted by Dave1001 Yes. And generationally, it could be explained by something like the Flyn effect. After reading and participating in countless I.D., God, and other superstitious debates online, I find myself agreeing with Prof. Hood... Are there any other studies in this same vein?

15th October 2006, 05:45 PM	#5
Kopji Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Mogollon Rim Posts: 7,697	I'm a little confused by his conclusions. If people were taught to have sentimental or adverse reactions to certain artifacts, why can't people be taught to have similar feelings about say, atheism or science? Somewhere there has developed the idea that people choose 'religion' or 'spirituality' by feelings, but feelings have no part in choices like atheism or disbelief. His argument does not make much sense if feelings are allowed as part of being human.

16th October 2006, 08:46 AM	#9
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,702	I wouldn't put much faith in the article this is the ONLY experimental evidence that it cites. Quote: Another experiment involves asking subjects to cut up a photograph. When his team then measures their galvanic skin response - ie sweat production, which is what lie-detector tests monitors - there is a jump in the reading. This does not occur when a person destroys an object of less sentimental significance. So he basicaly is using his philosophy to say that people should not teach science and that dawkins approach is counter productive. Sounds like he is an apologist.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

16th October 2006, 06:52 PM	#10
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 13,415	One of the iconic books of my youth was Eric Hoffer's The True Believer. One of his theses is that some people have a "will to believe" and that they can be turned from one strong belief to a competely contary one quite rapidly. To illustrate this he quotes Goebbels about how Communists could be converted into the "best" Nazis. I believe it was Jean Sheppard who popularized the saying, "Beware the True Believers. They are the worst kind."
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

16th October 2006, 07:14 PM	#11
Elizabeth I Olympic Equestrian Wannabe Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Defending the Alamo Posts: 9,255	Experimental psychologist? Don't those guys just run rats through mazes?

17th October 2006, 08:32 PM	#12
Glen.Nogami Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 495	Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto One of the iconic books of my youth was Eric Hoffer's The True Believer. One of his theses is that some people have a "will to believe" and that they can be turned from one strong belief to a competely contary one quite rapidly. To illustrate this he quotes Goebbels about how Communists could be converted into the "best" Nazis. I believe it was Jean Sheppard who popularized the saying, "Beware the True Believers. They are the worst kind." Maybe the issue there is something in the brain wired for strong conviction or some neurotransmitter that enables it? Wouldn't that be great? Medications for excessive belief. If you or someone you know is suffering from irrational convictions, please, talk to your doctor about Rationaloft.