NOM

This new wave of Choose To Believe rhetoric makes no sense to me.

1- I used to believe in Santa Claus.
2- I no longer believe in Santa Claus.
3- I DID NOT choose to stop believing in Santa Claus.
4- I really want Santa Claus to be real, but...
5- I CANNOT choose to believe in Santa Clause

Maybe human brains are wired differently but in my brain CHOOSING to believe is no different from PRETENDING to believe.

What am I missing?

I used scientology on my last response to this rhetoric with family. I stated I cannot choose to believe just as they can't choose to believe in scientology.

But the narrative goes beyond CTB, now they actually want you to feel guilty for even having doubts, making doubt a sin. Talk about cultish efforts to kill any critical thinking!

During one of the talks I had with DW through all of this she gave me the (somewhat cliche from what I've read) explanation that it's not about being raised in the church or what her parents would think, but because she chooses to believe.

And it's hard to rebut it because at the end of the day, you can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into.

But yeah, the logic behind it is stupid... and the moment you really think about it, you can see how hollow it is to defend faith that way.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:50 pmThis new wave of Choose To Believe rhetoric makes no sense to me.

1- I used to believe in Santa Claus.
2- I no longer believe in Santa Claus.
3- I DID NOT choose to stop believing in Santa Claus.
4- I really want Santa Claus to be real, but...
5- I CANNOT choose to believe in Santa Clause

Maybe human brains are wired differently but in my brain CHOOSING to believe is no different from PRETENDING to believe.

What am I missing?

Something I heard the other day that makes a bit of sense to me, add this to your list:

6- I am a TRUE BELIEVER, and I always have been, therefore: I NEED to believe in Santa Clause. To placate my NEED, I will perform Olympic level mental gymnastics to retain "belief" and my status as a TRUE BELIEVER.

jfro18 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:43 pmyou can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into.

Sorry, but I have to rebut this saying every time I read it: If it were actually "True™", I would not be here, and many other NOMies would not be here.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

wtfluff wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 2:10 pm

jfro18 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:43 pmyou can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into.

Sorry, but I have to rebut this saying every time I read it: If it were actually "True™", I would not be here, and many other NOMies would not be here.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Fair enough - and obviously I wouldn't be here if it never happened as well. It's without question an over-generalization, but as we also know from being here and going through this, it is extremely hard to use facts to debunk the church to believers until there is some emotional catalyst that opens them up to hearing it.

Don't leave out this one:

"It must be true because I'm in it."

This is the belief of an egotistical person who would never admit they would ever be duped by such a scheme. I think this attitude exists in a lot of the SP and higher offices where they say they have read all the arguments on both sides but came to a different conclusion than those who left. Church broke.

jfro18 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 2:48 pm

wtfluff wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 2:10 pm

jfro18 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 1:43 pmyou can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into.

Sorry, but I have to rebut this saying every time I read it: If it were actually "True™", I would not be here, and many other NOMies would not be here.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Fair enough - and obviously I wouldn't be here if it never happened as well. It's without question an over-generalization, but as we also know from being here and going through this, it is extremely hard to use facts to debunk the church to believers until there is some emotional catalyst that opens them up to hearing it.

Though it may be extremely hard to use facts to debunk the church, at some point, one of those facts can be the emotional catalyst that opens them up. Facts are all that we truly have for debunking. I believe everyone has a "chink" in the armor somewhere, and one of the hundreds of thousands of debunking facts can eventually find that chink

"Never give up!" said some famous person, some time.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:50 pm Maybe human brains are wired differently but in my brain CHOOSING to believe is no different from PRETENDING to believe.

What am I missing?

We have some conscious control over our beliefs, but not very much. General rules of thumb (IIRC backed up by research):

1. You can choose to believe or disbelieve a proposition when the natural pull of each is about the same.

2. You can choose how you find and admit evidence.

IMO, most members can't actually choose to believe or disbelieve the church's claims to authority. So believers aren't actually choosing to believe, and they're not pretending to believe, either.

However, they can choose to believe that they've chosen to believe. The evidence in favor is probably flimsy: "Once, I read some anti-Mormon stuff that made me doubt, but I felt the Spirit at church so I decided the anti-Mormon stuff must be wrong." Believers generally aren't aware of the tremendous social pressure they're under, so they have no counterevidence.

The new direction is very convenient. Believers get to feel good about something they didn't do, and they also get a stone to cast at non-believers.

I have a good friend that is a CTB guy. For him it goes something like this:

Wow none of this makes sense, its got to be a fraud.
World view goes topsy-turvey
No I don't feel happy
I will pray and fast so I can feel happy
A weird coincidence happened that is just too freaky to dismiss
Maybe I was wrong about the church and I should look at it differently, try to find ways it could be true
Find more coincidences, feel emotionally good about sharing and being part of the community again
This feels better than the despair I felt when my world view was upside down it must be the spirit
I was just looking at things as a cynic before, I will toss out the really crazy stuff but keep just enough to be a part of the community
I will continue to confirm a couple of key elements with apologetics, and ignore or dismiss the rest, I am making my choice.

"Choose to Believe" is demonstrably silly even when not used on things like Santa Claus, Flat Earth, and Scientology. Suppose you simply want to attend a small, local non-denominational Christian church. You could simply Choose To Believe in a spiritual experience that led you to a different faith tradition. I suspect that the fervent LDS believers will give very little credibility towards you if you simply claim your own spiritual experience in some other church. "You're Choosing To Believe in the wrong thing! You need to choose your belief back in Joseph Smith and Russell M. Nelson and the teachings in the Come Follow Me manual!"
Mormonism talks about free agency and making choices, but it is not forgiving when your choices don't align with the institutional church.

Reuben wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:29 pm 2. You can choose how you find and admit evidence.

I think that comes pretty close to hitting the nail on the head. The message is disguised as Choose To Believe, but everything they points to a message of Choose Not To Think.

In other words, kill the curiosity before it kills the cat.

As RubinHighlander pointed out, on one hand they tell you that questions are good, but then follow that up by telling you that actually thinking about them or investigating them is sinful (Renlunds) and that you should immediately beg God to make you remorseful for even having had the thoughts in the fist place (H. J. Eyering). That is intellectual coercion at its ugliest.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:49 am

Reuben wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:29 pm 2. You can choose how you find and admit evidence.

I think that comes pretty close to hitting the nail on the head. The message is disguised as Choose To Believe, but everything they points to a message of Choose Not To Think.

In other words, kill the curiosity before it kills the cat.

As RubinHighlander pointed out, on one hand they tell you that questions are good, but then follow that up by telling you that actually thinking about them or investigating them is sinful (Renlunds) and that you should immediately beg God to make you remorseful for even having had the thoughts in the fist place (H. J. Eyering). That is intellectual coercion at its ugliest.

Man that is a good summary of this... almost too good.