One could take this (a lot) further and argue that humans generally choose their beliefs according to personal incentives rather than some in furtherance of some exhaustive and noble pursuit of Truth.
One tired example: Big Tobacco executives who "honestly" believed that smoking didn't "cause" lung cancer. Some of those beliefs were no do…
One could take this (a lot) further and argue that humans generally choose their beliefs according to personal incentives rather than some in furtherance of some exhaustive and noble pursuit of Truth.
One tired example: Big Tobacco executives who "honestly" believed that smoking didn't "cause" lung cancer. Some of those beliefs were no doubt "honest" if only because they were founded in financial and social (status) incentives rather than in science.
But the same principle applies across incentives (e.g. social and financial) and beliefs (e.g. political and religions) of ALL kinds, likely including many if not most of my (!) (and your (?) beliefs.
No one understands this better than the Kremlin, which routinely offers multiple mutually contradictory explanations (e.g. to pick one minor instance, what suspected Russian agents were doing in Britain when Skripal was poisoned) so that citizens can choose the explanation that most conveniently aligns their own personal belief system and creates the least personal discomfort.
One could take this (a lot) further and argue that humans generally choose their beliefs according to personal incentives rather than some in furtherance of some exhaustive and noble pursuit of Truth.
One tired example: Big Tobacco executives who "honestly" believed that smoking didn't "cause" lung cancer. Some of those beliefs were no doubt "honest" if only because they were founded in financial and social (status) incentives rather than in science.
But the same principle applies across incentives (e.g. social and financial) and beliefs (e.g. political and religions) of ALL kinds, likely including many if not most of my (!) (and your (?) beliefs.
No one understands this better than the Kremlin, which routinely offers multiple mutually contradictory explanations (e.g. to pick one minor instance, what suspected Russian agents were doing in Britain when Skripal was poisoned) so that citizens can choose the explanation that most conveniently aligns their own personal belief system and creates the least personal discomfort.