A Contemplation on How to Believe

What is it to believe in something? You know we use words in order to communicate with each other supposedly more efficiently but every word represents a label. I mean that it is not necessary that this word has deeply the same meaning to everyone as it has to me. So as I was contemplating in this word I realized that there was a need for a bit more digging into it, a process that I believe has evolved my thinking.

I think there exist 2 general categories of ways that we understand what is going on in our environment, how all things that we don’t know work. The first is the information from several authorities. We all have some people that we trust what they say, we take it seriously and their opinion is important. Others have a guru, others read scientific papers, others scientific books, others literature, others go to personal development classes, others ask doctors, others watch TV, others ask their friends, others their parents, others go to schools of thought, others to the church, others to the pagoda etc

The second category is the personal experience. We can have one or multiple experiences of a similar situation and thus form an opinion about it. However, personal experience is thought to be limited in the sense that is not able to have a big amount of data in order to form a real objective model of a situation.

 

Misunderstanding of the Scientific Method

 

So with origins from ancient Greece, the scientific method is very much respected by the majority of the people. The process of forming a hypothesis which will be later tested and retested in the most objective conditions and later verified seems to be the way to receive the most accurate understanding of reality.

However, I think that we sometimes misunderstand this process and overestimate too many of the findings. At least this is what has happened to me for a few years. I have realized that I was accepting some scientific findings as constant whereas science is made to be fluid and everchanging. First of all, because any finding is subject to a later disproof because knowledge improves and more variables seem to be participating. Secondly, because there already exist contradictory studies about the exact same issues while later studies are trying to test which one is more accurate. And these later studies obviously will be tested by later ones and so on. How many of the scientific findings are so vastly proven that not only nobody can contradict them now but will never be able in the future, too?

At the same time, everybody in the scientific community accepts but only a few seem to be taking into account a very basic fact. That in any experiment the observer influences the experiment itself because he is a part of the whole system. So after knowing this how can we be certain that we have achieved perfect objectivity at any experiment? How can we know that the expectations of the experimenter don’t influence the outcome?

Henri Bergson in Time and Free Will argues after a thorough examination that what we consider as measurements in the material world are in fact measurements of the manifestations and not of what causes them. So when for example we measure the force of a punch we don’t actually measure something in the muscles, the movement of bones, the change in the blood circulation, the effects on the cells, the oxygen needed and too many other hidden from measurement variables. What we measure is the outward effect only. I think science not only does that out of preference but it doesn’t even look possible to be able to accurately measure all of these other processes influencing the punch. Even after a century later Bergson seems right, I think.

At the same time there exist several schools of thought based on philosophy, organized religions, heresies, political ideologies, spirituality. These don’t necessarily need a scientific foundation to base their understanding due to the unavoidable limitations of the scientific findings, some of which I just mentioned. I think that you don’t necessarily need an official proof of what you consider as right.

Schools of Thought as Sub-cultures

 

However, any school of thought ultimately represents a subculture. So what I normally notice is the followers of schools to have similar attitudes about certain phenomena, under certain circumstances they become angry and under certain circumstances become happy. They bring all their focus to specific issues while they find irrelevant all others. They are afraid of the idea that the leader of the group will find out if they do something opposed to the dogma. When someone puts himself under a certain label he automatically becomes self-limited to a model of a description of the world, of a way of living, of a way of acting. Without realizing the members imitate the others according to the group’s culture and explain the reality the way the teacher describes it. They use similar wording and learn by heart the teachings after revising and revising. They may even talk with certainty about the greatest mysteries of existence only because the guru said that. And are sure that everyone else apart from the members of the group is ignorant. I recall the Buddhist monk Pema Chodron talking about a neighbor of hers that could easily argue when someone didn’t agree with her. That same neighbor was an activist about free speech.

According to my experience, people need a model to be included because we want to grasp in something, feel that there is a meaning in what we do. Because models are not only the crystal clear ones like an organized church, models can be at any level of the society and at any type of ideas. In many of them, we are part and we don’t even know it because they may not have a specific name. According to their personality and experiences, others have their football team, others protect the immigrants, others protect their flag, others consider men as pigs, others hate the idea of the family, others believe that the earth is flat, others have different explanations about the life of Jesus Christ and so on.

All of these are fixed ideas that represent a dogma that obviously is not possible to represent the same way all of the members. I don’t think it’s possible everyone to have recognised the same things in their lives or had the same experiences that lead to these same examples. But even if they all have already had the same experiences how can they be sure about explanations on issues they haven’t ever experienced?

I have followed many Schools of Thought

 

I have followed several schools of thought that have both been based in science and not, as I was always searching, to know more about the world was amazing me. I have always been looking for teachers to show me the way. To guide me in the new interest I had. To teach me the new ideology that would make me happy at last.

I remember myself always showing tremendous passion for my ideas. In whichever model I was into I was fully focused, I wanted to know everything about it and I would admire everyone that was thought to be “good” in this. I was always sure that I had reached the end of the tunnel and that I had found the Holy Grail. Because it looked to me that all these new ideas I had been introduced had all the answers! In my mind, I could justify everything. I was always ready for work to put into practice the words of the teacher and the dogma in order to receive the results that the teacher said. In all this process didn’t matter at all what my personal tendencies were, I had only to focus on the work to surely receive the benefits as it was claimed had happened with so many others. Interestingly enough, I was going from a set of ideas to set of ideas every few years forgetting that I was approaching it with a similar attitude.

All of these rationalizations justified the polarization that I was into about certain subjects. So it would be understandable to be angry about an issue that was against my beliefs. It was normal to condemn anyone that didn’t agree or didn’t understand because they hadn’t reached the level I was. There wasn’t a need for compassion for the others that couldn’t do and read the same things as me.

My love for the intellect mixed with the urgent need for something to hold on to was guiding me for years. Many times my self-esteem wasn’t real but was based on the very good sense that the ideas were making in my mind. However, in fact I had low confidence as I was always searching for mentors to tell me what is correct and what is not, most of the times without taking into account my personality.

My low confidence was also proved by another series of phenomena that I have commonly seen happening. As someone personally grows through a certain group and gains a better understanding, after sometimes realizes that the ones that were supposed to be the good ones, in fact, don’t have the abilities we thought they had. This, as I have experienced it, comes together with another process. That the people that continue searching after sometime feel limited by the ideology of their group and decide to move on after they have offered what they could as a repayment for what they were offered. However, these are mostly treated as traitors and are thought to have forgotten their values.

Fluidity governing literally everything and the need for constant change

 

So, the way I see it, staying constantly under a label is more of a game in the intellect and not so much of experience. Also, perhaps there exist spiritual people whose levels of consciousness in the understanding of reality are so high that not everyone can recognize that but once again I am not sure how you can fully trust that they know everything, the contradiction arises instantly.

Therefore there isn’t anything constant in the physical world we live in so no model can accurately represent it while at the same time the human senses and intellect are limited. The only way that seems to make sense to me is that unavoidably we have to be searching in dark waters by taking into account the information but guided by intuition. Whatever we intellectually know about something should be instantly stripped away and we should observe with amazing curiosity in order to experience it in full. And then really “know” what is it about. Of course, you will know what it is for you and not for everyone else, it’s your own perception of reality.

Thus, I realized that trying to hold on to a school of thought in order to know the truth or to have confidence because the other members of the group agree with me was vain.

A new approach

 

So in the last few years, my approach changed. First of all, I put myself in this equation. A specific way of instructions or a model is not just suitable for everyone. It can’t be by definition. People behave differently, prefer to operate differently, they have different personalities and so many other variables that it seems impossible to be able to take all of them into account. One method of instructions can be very good for some, average to others and useless to others. Whatever we learn that has to do with life has to take into account ourselves. But at the same time, everything we learn is useful if we apply it according to us in real life.

Secondly, even more than before I approach different ideas. But this time with a different attitude. I may participate in a group, I may go to classes, I may read books, I may follow teachings, I may ask questions but by always remembering not to be dragged into it. However, I try to not be predisposed and as mentioned without thinking much. I am open and I wait for the experience to show me if it is real for me or not. If I don’t experience it as real I cannot verify it, however, I cannot deny it either. Because I don’t know how my understanding will be in the future. Maybe my consciousness grows in a way that it will be real for me in the future. It has happened to me so many times in the past.

Many times we become impressed with the way people explain something. When we don’t know a person with little knowledge of the subject but with good social skills they can easily fool us. I always keep in my mind thoughts like: “How are you sure that this is true, have you experienced it or it is just impressive?”, or “Have you seen enough to be certain or this information only justifies your ego?” I keep thinking all the time how can I be going around and talking by taking for granted information that I have never experienced. How can I remove my personal element from it? I understood that forming the right questions is much more important than trying to form answers.

So I sit back more now, I don’t need to rush to explain how something works. I still want to know but I don’t care how much I know. I can know something and I cannot know it. I want to be able to admit that to everybody without a problem. I know that when the time comes the situations will be appropriate for me to take the lesson I need to evolve myself. I am just trying to put as many positive influences around me which are the appropriate environment for my seeds to grow when their natural time comes.

I don’t think there is anything I believe very much. Instead of trying to define myself under some label, I am focused in making my perception of life according to how I have experienced it at its own pace. I think it’s pointless to rush to learn because for me it is unnatural, the human brain needs to be working in lower frequencies to have the appropriate aha moments that grow its consciousness.

What about all the theories?

 

It also looks that only vanity’s could be the approach to think you know something because of the books or any other source of information, independently how credible it looks. There is so huge difference in the intensity between experience and idea about the experience. It’s not a coincidence that people who actually have an experience don’t talk about it much while the others that don’t may talk about it for ages. It’s the difference in the intensity, no words are needed for the one that has already done or doing something. The ones not having the experience seem to be trying to imitate it by constantly repeating ideas about it. However, the fact that this goes so long shows that still after this the difference in the intensity between experience and ideas is huge.

From the things I can’t verify through experience, there are two categories.The ones that make sense to me and ones that don’t. I keep in my mind info from both categories waiting to see if I will indeed verify the first while waiting if there is any new understanding of mine that would make the second make sense. In the latter case, I reexamine it. I believe I understand some things but I try to not forget that this is subject to change.

From model to model and the lessons

 

Looking back now, fortunately, I find out that even though I have been so many times polarised in the short term, my deep love for the truth prevailed in the long term. That’s the reason that after some period of fanaticism I would find something different that would prove that I had many mistaken beliefs. I don’t know where I will be lead with all of this and I am not sure if my actions are correct but I know that it is on a different level now. I know that I can’t always know so I don’t whip myself to conform to something that someone says is right. I have to keep a clear mind and make a decision about myself by taking everything into account.

Also, the fact that I have been fully immersed in so many different models has vastly helped me now understand all of them very well and recognize instantly when other people are into them. Because they are a part of myself in a sense. And they remind me of how I was thinking when I was limited in this concept, it’s very interesting. This makes me unable to criticize it. But they also remind me that still there exist models unknown to me yet that I am into which are limiting my thinking similarly, however they are expected to be identified.

I know that it’s a natural tendency for me to learn new things but I don’t count, I enjoy the process of learning. Because I think highly of knowledge and understanding I don’t want to easily say that I know something. I don’t have a need to prove that I am right because I know that I may not be or what is right for me is wrong for the other one or that I may not be experienced enough to judge wrong and right and so on. But I can have my perception.

The above understandings have helped me tremendously I believe. If you prefer truth than your ego then going towards the first demands a readiness to sacrifice the latter at any moment. When your mind through cognitive biases tries to convince you that you know enough to be certain, remind yourself that it’s an overestimation. When someone talks to you, try to be fully immersed in the communication without thinking how it should all be and then only form an idea about how you found what you experienced. When you disagree you don’t need to oppose because of that fact, you may be able to learn something useful plus you could connect what you both already know and reach a harmonic result.

There is darkness in the waters at first because we can’t know the future. Thus, there is uncertainty in the world and everyone is pressurizing us to do more. But I think it’s not necessary to synchronize with that, you can approach it with curiosity and readiness to learn. Either you believe that things happen for a reason or not you can choose what lesson to take from everything that happens to you. It’s possible to say that everything that happens to you is to teach you a lesson and then find that lesson. You can do that.

There is always out there something that you have never imagined

 

I think that in order for the thinking to always be evolving there is a need for a deep understanding that there is more beyond what you already know. And whatever you don’t know you cannot imagine it, it doesn’t have any form so you subconsciously assume that whatever is contained in your intellect is everything. So when you leave the window open for the surprise, the new experience can take its part and propel your personal growth.

It doesn’t matter what other people say because it will always be your choice in the end. As you know, it’s hard to not do what your clear mind tells you to do. Even if you later realize it wasn’t a good choice you will have learned both from the processes of why you made it and why it didn’t work so well. It seems that the road is meant to be lonely and mysterious. There is no other possibility. Else it wouldn’t make any sense. If everything was known and predictable we wouldn’t stand to live with such boredom, like in the Groundhog Day. You can then be harmonious to it. Embrace the mystery because this is the doorway to all understanding, as Lao Tzu wisely had written.