Can you choose to believe something, just like that?
But is that how belief works – can you simply choose to believe?
People can, of course, choose to read certain sources, spend time with certain groups, or reflect on a certain matter – all of which influence their beliefs. But all of these choices involve evidence of some kind. We often choose which evidence to expose ourselves to, but the evidence itself seems to be in the driver's seat in causing beliefs.
For much of the past 2,000 years, philosophers would have been perfectly comfortable with the software developer's claim that belief is a matter of choice. A long line of distinguished thinkers – from the Stoic philosopher Epictetus and Saint Augustine of Hippo to French rationalist René Descartes and early feminist Mary Astell have held that people can exercise at least some control over their beliefs.
Over the past half-century, however, 'doxastic voluntarism' – the idea that belief is under the control of the will – has been widely rejected. Most current philosophers don't think people can immediately believe something 'just like that,' simply because they want to. What beliefs someone ends up having are determined by the people and environments they are exposed to – from beliefs about a deity to beliefs about the solar system.
As a philosophy professor myself, I've dedicated years of reflection to this issue. I've come to think both camps get something right.
Some philosophers think that the nature of belief itself ensures that people cannot just choose what to believe.
They argue that beliefs have a 'truth-aim' built into them: that is, beliefs characteristically represent reality. And sadly, reality often does not obey our wishes and desires; we cannot just decide to think reality is a certain way.
No matter how much I may want to be 6 feet, 8 inches tall, reality will faithfully imprint it upon my consciousness that I am 5'11" every time I glance in the mirror or make an appearance on the basketball court. Were I to resolve to believe that I am 6'8", I would quickly find that such resolutions are wholly ineffective.
Or consider another example. If belief were truly voluntary, I would gladly relinquish my belief that climate change is afoot – imagine how less worried I'd be. But I cannot. The evidence, along with the widespread agreement among scientific authorities, has indelibly impressed upon my mind that climate change is part of reality.
Regardless of whether I want to believe or not believe, bare desire isn't enough to make it happen. Beliefs seem largely outside of our direct control.
But if that's true, some rather alarming consequences seem to follow. It seems we had better stop blaming people for their beliefs, no matter how far-fetched.
Suppose I believe a dangerous falsehood: that Bill Gates used the COVID-19 vaccine to implant microchips in people, or that climate change is a hoax, or that the Holocaust is an elaborate fabrication. If belief is involuntary, it looks as though I am innocent of any wrongdoing. These beliefs just happened to me, so to speak. If beliefs are not voluntary, then they seem the spontaneous result of my being exposed to certain influences and ideas – including, in this case, conspiracy theory chat forums.
Now, people can choose what influences they allow into their lives – to some extent. I can decide where to gather information about climate trends: a chat forum, the mainstream media, or the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I can decide how much to reflect on what such sources tell me, along with their motivations. Almost all contemporary philosophers think that people can exert this type of voluntary control over their beliefs.
But does that mean I am responsible for the beliefs I arrive at? Not necessarily.
After all, which sources we decide to consult, and how we evaluate them, can also be shaped by our preexisting beliefs. I am not going to trust the U.N. climate panel's latest report if, say, I believe it is a part of a global conspiracy to curtail free markets – especially not if I had many similar beliefs drummed into me since childhood.
It gets difficult to see how individuals could have any meaningful freedom over their beliefs, or any meaningful responsibility.
Research has led me to think that things are a bit less grim – and a bit less black and white.
Philosopher Elizabeth Jackson and I recently carried out a study, not yet published, involving more than 300 participants. We gave them brief summaries of several scenarios where it was unclear whether an individual had committed a crime.
The evidence was ambiguous, but we asked participants whether they could choose to believe the individual was innocent 'just like that,' without having to gather evidence or think critically. Many people in the study said that they could do exactly this.
It's possible they were mistaken. Still, several recent studies at the intersection of philosophy and psychology suggest people can control some of their beliefs, especially in situations where the evidence is ambiguous.
And that describes many of the most important propositions people are forced to consider, from politics and careers to romance: Who is the best candidate? Which path should I pursue? Is she the one?
So, it looks like we have some reason to think people are able to directly control their beliefs, after all. And if the evidence for God is similarly ambiguous, perhaps my software developer was right that he could decide to believe.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Mark Boespflug, Fort Lewis College
Read more:
What is love? A philosopher explains it's not a choice or a feeling − it's a practice
Lincoln called for divided Americans to heed their 'better angels,' and politicians have invoked him ever since in crises − but for Abe, it was more than words
Stoicism and spirituality: A philosopher explains how more Americans' search for meaning is turning them toward the classics
Mark Boespflug receives funding from the John Templeton Foundation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
20 minutes ago
- CBS News
Fawn stuck in metal grate freed by Oakland County rescue team
The Oakland County Sheriff's Search and Rescue Team in Michigan freed a fawn stuck in a metal grate on Friday afternoon. According to the sheriff's office, the team responded to the incident on the 600 block of Tonkawa Trail in Orion Township around 12:40 p.m. A caller reported the fawn was trapped in a metal grate in Manitou Lake. The sheriff's office said it had been there for several hours and was having difficulty keeping its head above water. Officials said the team was quickly able to free the fawn. The fawn was checked by Oakland County Animal Control before it was released. "It's always a great day when we can respond to a call and save a life," Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said in a news release Friday. "Be it human, or in this case, a cute little fawn!"
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
We Tested 7 Ways to Make Bacon — One Was the Clear Winner
From frying to grilling and baking, we put bacon cooking methods to the test. Here's what came out on Takeaways From the Test Kitchen Baking bacon on a foil-lined sheet pan at 400°F for about 22 minutes yields evenly crisp, flat strips and lets you cook up to 10 slices at once — the test kitchen's clear winner. For smaller batches, starting bacon in a cold cast-iron skillet slowly renders fat, keeps shrinkage minimal, and turns out consistently crispy slices in roughly eight minutes. Microwave, sous vide, hot-skillet, grill-pan, and air-fryer methods produced tough or uneven bacon, demanded more hands-on attention, or couldn't match the oven's far as I'm concerned, bacon goes with just about everything. From melty egg sandwiches and grilled burgers to crisp salads and even sweet ice creams, that combination of salty, savory, and slightly smoky flavor is the perfect complement to any meal of the day. When it comes to how bacon is prepared, however, there are really two camps — one for those who like an evenly crispy, well-rendered strip of bacon, and another for those who like it a bit chewier. I happen to fit in the evenly crispy, well-rendered strip of bacon camp, but how I achieve that perfectly cooked bacon is incredibly inconsistent. Sometimes I layer bacon strips in a cold cast-iron skillet and slowly cook them over a low heat, carefully flipping every so often to ensure even cooking. Other times I'm in a hurry or focused on another element of a meal and I simply lay them on a foil-lined baking sheet and bake them until crispy. With that in mind, we tested seven different methods for cooking bacon to determine which produced the best results. Read on to find out which method we liked best. A word about our method Before getting into the results, it's important to note these cooking methods were all conducted in our professional test kitchen, though all of our equipment and tools are the same used in a home kitchen. In addition, all tests used Smithfield Applewood Smoked Bacon for consistency purposes. The tests did not use center-cut or thick-cut varieties of bacon, which may produce different results. All of the methods we tested (oven, cold start in a skillet, hot skillet, air fryer, grill pan, sous vide, and microwave) technically worked, but their effectiveness at producing evenly crisp, well-rendered, and slightly chewy bacon varied greatly. A quick spin in the microwave Cook Time: 5 minutesTotal Time: 5 minutesRating: 5/10 Method: The fastest and most convenient way to cook bacon is in the microwave. Start by placing slices of bacon on a plate lined with two layers of paper towels. Cover the bacon with two more layers of paper towels then microwave on high for 1 minute per slice of bacon. For crispier bacon, continue microwaving on high in 30-second intervals. Results: Our testers found cooking bacon in the microwave produced the worst results. The bacon was overly tough, chewy, and lacked everything that makes bacon so delicious (there was no browning or rendered fat). At best, one tester said it could be used for bacon bits, but another said this was the one method they would never consider using under any circumstance. Pros: Using a microwave to cook bacon is super-simple, but that's about the only good thing to say about it. Cons: The results of cooking bacon in a microwave were simply not good. The bacon turned out unpleasant, chewy, and tough. A long sous vide soak Cook Time: 12 hoursTotal Time: 12 hours, 5 minutesRating: 6/10 Method: This method requires an immersion circulator to slowly cook the bacon at a consistent temperature for a very long time, until the bacon is ultra-tender. Prepare an immersion circulator in a water bath according to the manufacturer's directions and set it to 145°F. Then place an unopened package of bacon in the bath and cook it for at least 12 hours or up to 48 hours. When you are ready to serve, remove the bacon from the bath, carefully open, and cook on a cast-iron griddle over medium-high heat until browned on both sides, about 2 minutes per side. Results: What makes sous vide cooking so ideal is the controlled, even cooking for larger proteins. It ensures delicate proteins aren't overcooked and makes for an incredibly tender final product. But that doesn't mean it's an ideal kitchen gadget for all applications, and it happens to be a bit overkill for preparing slices of bacon. It actually produced fine results, similar to some of our other favorite methods, but it simply takes too long for only decent outcomes for us to recommend hauling out an immersion circulator. Pros: The bacon turned out quite good but certainly not better than other methods. Cons: Using an immersion circulator to cook slices of bacon is overkill, to say the least. It takes at least 12 hours and the payoff is just not worth it. Of course, you also need to have an immersion circulator to use this method. Starting in a hot skillet Cook Time: 10 minutesTotal Time: 10 minutesRating: 7/10 Method: This is the method you may be most familiar with as it simply calls for cooking slices of bacon in a preheated skillet. For this method use a 12-inch cast-iron skillet heated over medium, then arrange bacon strips in a single layer. You can likely only fit 4 slices comfortably. Cook the bacon until crispy, about 7 minutes. Flip the bacon often and adjust the temperature as needed to avoid burning. Results: If you prefer your bacon more chewy than crispy, then this is the method for you. Because the skillet is already hot by the time the bacon hits the pan, the bacon tends to seize a bit. That means you'll experience noticeable shrinkage and overall uneven cooking. It also takes some time to cook a full package of bacon since you can really only fit 4 slices in the skillet without overcrowding the pan. Pros: This is one of the easiest ways to cook bacon as you only need a large skillet. It's also relatively fast compared to other methods and produces decent results. Cons: The bacon will seize in a hot skillet and shrink, actually creating uneven cooking. The final product is quite inconsistent, too, with some parts of the bacon crispy, while others are chewy. Grilling in a pan Cook Time: 10 minutesTotal Time: 10 minutesRating: 8/10 Method: Similar to the hot skillet method, simply heat a large grill pan over medium, arrange slices of bacon in an even layer, and cook until crispy, about 8 minutes. Be sure to adjust the heat and flip frequently to prevent burning. Results: The grill pan method ranks just a bit higher than the hot skillet method simply because you may be able to cook more bacon in a grill pan compared to a round skillet. But the end results are nearly identical to cooking in a hot skillet. This method requires your complete attention as you'll need to control the heat and flip often to avoid burning. Bacon cooked in a grill pan has chewy bits and crispy areas, which is how some people like their bacon. This method is recommended by testers if you don't have the countertop appliance in the next method. Pros: Similar to the hot skillet method, using a grill pan is easy and relatively convenient. It slightly edges out the hot skillet method simply because you may be able to fit more slices of bacon on a grill pan rather than a round skillet. Cons: This also produces inconsistent results, with chewy and crispy bits of bacon throughout the testing process. You also need to give the bacon your full attention as it cooks to avoid burning. Air-frying Cook Time: 25 minutesTotal Time: 30 minutesRating: 9/10 Method: Using an air fryer to cook bacon has the advantage of hands-free cooking, but it comes with some compromises. Start by preheating an air fryer to 350°F for 10 minutes, then arrange 4 bacon slices flat on the bottom of the air fryer basket. Be sure to leave at least 1/2-inch space between each slice for even air flow. Cook until the bacon is crispy, about 8 minutes, flipping halfway through. Results: This is the test kitchen's go-to method for anyone who prefers bacon with contrasting textures. Some parts of the bacon will be pleasantly chewy while others will be thoroughly rendered and crispy. Yes, this is hands-off cooking, but you can only fit about 4 slices in an average-size air fryer basket. While this is a solid option, our top two methods really outshine every other on this list so far. Pros: The air fryer is hands-free cooking, producing pleasantly chewy bacon, albeit a bit inconsistent compared to other methods. Cons: You can only fit about 4 slices of bacon in an average-size air fryer basket, plus it's difficult to achieve uniformly crispy strips of bacon. Starting in a cold skillet Cook Time: 10 minutesTotal Time: 10 minutesRating: 9/10 Method: Instead of preheating a 12-inch cast iron skillet, simply layer in slices of bacon to the cold skillet then turn the heat to medium. Cook until crispy, about 8 minutes, flipping often and reducing heat to prevent burning. Results: This was the test kitchen's recommended method if you are only planning to cook 1 to 4 slices of bacon, as it produces consistently crispy, well-rendered bacon. Also, starting bacon in a cold skillet means it won't shrink as much and instead will lay fairly flat. If you want to make a BLT or club sandwich and need just a few crispy slices of bacon, this is the ideal method for that. But if you want to cook more bacon with similar crispy, flat results, our final entry is the method for you. Pros: This is one of the best methods for achieving consistently crispy slices of bacon. The bacon will also stay relatively flat as it cooks, meaning minimal shrinkage. It's perfect anytime you want to cook just a few slices of bacon at one time. Cons: You will need to give the bacon some attention as it cooks, adjusting heat to avoid burning. You can only cook 4 slices of bacon at one time. Winner: Baking bacon in the oven Cook Time: 25 minutesTotal Time: 30 minutesRating: 10/10 Method: To cook lots of bacon at once, start by preheating the oven to 400°F with a rack in center position. Line a baking sheet with aluminum foil and arrange 10 bacon slices in a single layer. Bake until crispy, about 22 minutes, rotating the pan from front to back halfway through cooking. Results: The absolute best way to cook evenly crispy and consistent bacon, and a lot of it at once, is in the oven. This was the test kitchen's favorite method as it struck all the important factors: hands-off cooking, perfectly crispy bacon, up to 10 slices at once, and consistent results over multiple tests. This is also one of the simplest methods, which goes to show that sometimes the easiest, fuss-free methods produce the best results. Pros: You can make a lot of bacon at one time and the results are very consistent. It's the most ideal way to cook bacon if you like evenly crispy strips of bacon. This is also almost entirely hands-free, meaning it's mostly fuss-free. Cons: It takes a while to cook bacon in the oven compared to other methods. Final Takeaways While there is no wrong method when it comes to cooking bacon (aside, perhaps, from microwaving), it's clear that if you love evenly crispy bacon and want little hands-on effort, then the oven is not only the easiest method, it's also the best. Read the original article on Food & Wine
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mother-in-Law Schedules Visit to Meet 1-Week-Old Grandchild 'Without Asking' 'Exhausted' Mom — and Brings 'a Stranger Along'
"I don't want to entertain guests, I don't want to make small talk, and I definitely don't want to host someone I've never met before," she writes on RedditNEED TO KNOW A woman says her mother-in-law has planned a surprise visit to see her just days after she gave birth — and she wants to bring someone along But the woman says she's in no condition for visitors Now, she wants to know if it would be "unreasonable" to say she doesn't want visitors yetA woman says her mother-in-law has planned a surprise visit to see her just one week after she gave birth. In a post shared to Reddit, the anonymous woman writes, "I just gave birth to my second daughter five days ago, and I've just returned home from the hospital. I'm physically still recovering, bleeding, breastfeeding, barely sleeping, and emotionally trying to settle into this new chapter. "On top of that, my older daughter is feeling a bit emotional and clingy after I was away for a few days, so things are already overwhelming," she adds. Despite her current situation, her mother-in-law sent a message in their family group chat stating that "she has 'scheduled' a visit to come over in two days." The matriarch noted that she would be bringing her sister along, whom the poster has "never met." "She never asked me if I'm okay with this. She just informed* us that she's coming," she adds. Now, the woman writes, she's "furious." "I don't understand how someone (even the baby's grandmother) thinks it's appropriate to invite themselves into a postpartum woman's home less than a week after she's given birth, without asking, and worse, to bring a stranger along," she writes. "I'm in pain. I'm exhausted. I'm bleeding. I'm trying to soothe a newborn and help my toddler adjust. I haven't slept properly in nights. I don't want to entertain guests, I don't want to make small talk, and I definitely don't want to host someone I've never met before." Now, she wants to know if it would be "unreasonable" to say she doesn't want visitors yet. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Fellow Reddit users are advising the woman to let her husband handle it. "This is a husband/partner conversation to have with her and not your battle. Tell him that you aren't feeling good and don't want anyone over until x date and ask them to tell their mother that she needs to reschedule," writes one Reddit user in the comments. "This is absolutely transgressing and inconsiderate behavior. It's not only impolite but also insane to impose yourself without asking on a woman so shortly postpartum," another added. "I would be livid. And not hosting her. Tell your husband to write it doesn't work for you and you tell her when you guys (as a family !!! Not you yourself) are ready." In an update, the woman shares that her husband "did step up" and told his mom that she is "still recovering" and "completely exhausted," asking that she reschedule the visit to a time he is also home. However, his mother "kept insisting on visiting anyway." "She completely disregarded our boundaries and made it about what's convenient for her and her guests, not what's best for me or the baby," the poster writes. Since her mother-in-law has refused to compromise, the poster plans on "locking myself and my kids in the bedroom and resting" when her in-laws come over. "As many of you suggested, I don't owe anyone my time, energy, or space, especially not when I'm already depleted," she writes. "I'm done trying to accommodate someone who clearly doesn't care about my wellbeing." Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
