Q: (Andrea Garatshun)
Does this sound true? ... 'When your world view and beliefs align as close to reality as possible, you will have a better chance at being psychologically healthy.' What do you think?
Discussion:
Perhaps this might depend on what criteria are used for measuring psychological health? There are studies that claim that religious faith reduces stress, but I doubt that the dynamics are so simple. It may do so in the short term, but not the long term. Moreover - it may very much depend upon the intelligence, emotional intelligence, and personality profile of the individual. That said, I think that Sagan was ultimately right. Facing reality without delusive narratives is the best way in the end, and better for everyone.
Evolutionary debunking theories like that of Plantinga rely upon the idea that evolution is an off track process - that it does not care about whether an organism's brain evolves to track what is really going on so long as the organism survives: so long as it is fitter and out-competes its con-specifics. However - as Griffiths and Wilkins have argued evolution is not an off track process. Our cognition has evolved to track information in the environment as accurately as resources allow for in the time available. That is why evolution has selected us to have lots of energy guzzling brain matter - to track the information with a minimum of type one errors (not getting the right facts - or getting the facts wrong.) Otherwise the ape gets squashed by falling rocks, and out competed by the other apes.
Religious beliefs seemingly do not have to be directly based upon truth tracking, but it does not follow that faithist's cognition is not indirectly tracking a certain truth - that if they adhere to certain beliefs they will do better in the social group. At this point it is the health of the social group and the nature of the beliefs that determines the outcome. Group delusion might be okay for some improved outcomes - but not too good for other important things. It is the root of pragmatism applied as James applied it. It does not follow that our cognition is not best served as being truth tracking.
So here is a question - who was more psychologically healthy - Giordano Bruno (whom Cardinal Bellarmine burned) or Galileo (who listened to Foscarini and avoided a roasting.) I think that Bruno was arguably just as healthy, but that his society was pathological. Both he and Galileo were healthier than Bellarmine - who was freaking mad. Unfortunately, brute force has a lot to do with success in human affairs. Best perhaps to pretend in some circumstances - but some faithists don't just pretend - they dissimulate persistently. That is pathological.
No comments:
Post a Comment