Reflexively examining belief: A fundamental requirement of being.
There are many things that distinguish humans from other animals. Some of the most significant aspects are language, imagination, and our capacity to experience the transcendant. But another distinct characteristic is our ability to participate in, and structure our lives around belief. Our attachment to our beliefs seems to perform an important function, or why bother with it? Even the enlightenment, which ushered in a new wave of scientific consciousness didn’t encourage us to cut our ancient ties to ‘the Gods’.
As someone who was raised Catholic, went to catholic schools my whole life, and spent hours in catechism – I’ve seen how seriously people take their beliefs. Not just religious beliefs either. We take on a number of different types of belief in our lives. Some more ordinary than others. I believe for example, that I’m writing a good essay. But that of course, is subject to interpretation and depends on many different factors. For the sake of practicality, I’ll talk mostly about religious belief in this essay.
I’m writing to explore our relationship to belief; framing it as a fundamental aspect of being. I explore the socio-psychological function of belief on both a collective and personal level. To do this, it’s important that I begin by defining belief and discussing the various philosophical outlooks concerning its aim. Then, I will go on to discuss the psychological conditions necessary to experience belief. I will go on to look at belief systems and the value hierarchies which they create, discussing my personal experiences as anecdotal evidence. This will lead into a discussion about the psychological function of belief as a response to the emergence of self-awareness by looking at ancient belief systems and the role that imagination played in their creation. I then touch on Jungian Archetypes and discusses their potential role in the conception of religious belief systems. Finally, I conclude on the functionality of belief, discussing its driving forces in the development of society and the individual.
---
The word ‘belief’ refers to attitudes concerning true or false concepts. There is a discussion amongst philosophers about the aim of belief and its sociological role. There are various schools of thought in this department. The idea that “belief aims at truth” was first explored by Bernard Williams (1973). There are many others who support this claim, maintaining that knowledge is the ultimate aim of belief. Other schools of thought propose a more pragmatic outlook, suggesting that the essential purpose of belief is to fulfil practical goals such as survival or utility. For example, Millikan (1984) claims that ‘beliefs are integrated in a naturally selected cognitive system having the function of tracking features of the world in order to help in the satisfaction of biological needs such as survival and reproduction’. Other philosophers find themselves somewhere in between both approaches, suggesting that the aim of belief is reasonability and justification, or that the purpose lies in developing virtues such as understanding (Kvanvig, 2003). I personally think neither position is unreasonable, so I decided to explore belief by unpacking the psychological conditions that give rise to its existence.
Belief begins with self-awareness: a knowledge of the individual nature of oneself, and the perception of that individuality in relation to a collective. There are some fundamental elements that interact with the individual’s self-awareness which give rise to belief. The first one of these elements is knowledge. Even if the aim of belief is in part, knowledge, there must be some knowledge to first presuppose those beliefs on. This can be a very small amount i.e. For example: as a child, my catholic upbringing raised me to believe in a Christian God. I of course at the time, had relatively little knowledge about the world. But I knew enough about the nature of life to conceptualise the idea of a God, and believe it. I knew animals and plants were born and died, I knew we had a sun and moon, I knew a little about weather systems and geography etc.
The next element is personal experience. To some varying degree, your personal experience will validate or give rise to some form of belief. This needn’t be validated by another other circumstance except that of the individual(s) who form the belief. For example, Ancient civilisations explained rain, thunder, sun etc. as manifestations of the Gods simply because they experienced them and lacked scientific information about weather systems. Clifford's Principle states that “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence.” But insufficient evidence has never seemed to prevent the existence of belief. After all, the existence of rain hardly seems sufficient evidence for the existence of Zeus but it never stopped the Ancient Greeks from worshipping him. To me, ‘sufficient evidence’ appears to be contextual, and may reduce the credibility of a belief, but does not prevent it from arising. ‘Sufficient’ evidence is determined by the individual(s) who adopt the belief.
The next element is imagination. Belief, by definition implies gaps in knowledge. Part of the integration of knowledge and personal experience is the ability to fill in the gaps with imagination. I know that personally during my early teens when I was preparing to be confirmed in the church, I had no real conception of what ‘God’ was. I used imagination to conceptualise an abstract, omnipotent being and creator because it was the only method I had to integrate my beliefs at the time. I’ll speak more on the role of imagination later in the essay.
The final element, and the only one which is optional in the equation, is critical thinking. Belief does not require introspection. However, engaging in it doesn’t invalidate the nature of belief. I conceptualise belief as a state of being which is derived from the interaction of knowledge, personal experience, imagination and critical thinking with and the self. By this standard, all humans are subject to belief. It’s an inescapable disposition. Various beliefs interact with one another to form an ideology or belief system which gives rise to a set of values. These values act as proponents of the belief system, providing a mechanism for its manifestation in the social structure and behaviour patterns of the individual(s).
Humans are particular in the way we arrange our perceptions in order to make sense of the world. This applies to values as well. Our values are perceived hierarchically and are ordered by importance relative to one another (Schwartz 2012). Claire Douglas reinforces Schwartz’s observation, recognising that ‘The trade-off among relevant competing values guides attitudes and behaviours (Douglas 1985). This serves a purpose because we become reduced to inaction in crucial moments if we cannot ascertain the relative importance of our values in that context. It’s important in that sense, that we individually have an ultimate value situated the top of our value hierarchy.
I’ve personally felt the dramatic ways that different belief systems can alter your behaviour. Despite my Catholic upbringing, I still felt disillusioned in regards to religion and life’s big questions. The idea of an omnipotent, interventionist, all merciful God who would condemn you to hell for eternity for disobeying his rules seemed too paradoxical to be true. I began to challenge my religion and look elsewhere for answers. This coincided with quite a prolonged depressive episode and - voila! Perfect recipe for spiritual Enlightenment. I discovered Eastern spirituality and was convinced I had stumbled across the answers I had been looking for. This lead to me transforming my whole lifestyle practically overnight in accordance with the new values I had acquired. I became vegetarian, started meditating daily, practising kindness etc. The idea that I was responsible for my own karma resonated deeply with my independent spirit and motivated me to take responsibility for my actions. The experience developed my self-awareness by helping me realise that I was the observer of my mind. I finally felt I had some control over the quality of my thoughts, or at least how I reacted to them.
Altering my belief system lead to a fundamental change in how I viewed the world, and ultimately how I navigated it. I thought that I was free of what I viewed at the time as a form of repressive indoctrination. I was naïve in thinking that I didn’t have to believe in things anymore. This was the first time I felt encouraged to incorporate critical thinking into spirituality rather than being made to feel guilty about questioning or doubting. The answers I was receiving resonated so deeply, they felt like truths that didn’t require a leap of faith. I came to realise that I was actually wrong about that, there would always be questions and mysteries regarding life, and that my beliefs would grow and change as I experienced and learned more.
A thing that interests me when I reflect on that journey, is that I thought I was no longer relying on belief to structure my perception and actions. I felt that my new values were evidence based, grounded in logic, strengthened by fact, and validated by personal experience. I had reconceptualised God and this time it made a lot more sense. Whilst some beliefs can certainly be more valid than others, identifying with what you consider evidence-based belief systems doesn’t then prevent you from relying on belief to structure your outlook. Your beliefs may reflect a more accurate perception of truth (which is a complicated concept in itself) but it’s still a long way from seeing the picture clearly.
The irony in thinking your fundamental outlook is based on evidence and logic is that
adopting secular ideology doesn’t make you less likely to participate in and structure your life around belief. The ultimate value adopted by anybody or group, performs the function of a deity by governing their actions. For example, if the atheist’s ultimate value is logic and science, then logic and science are the values the use to navigate the world, mediate their social interactions and ultimately guides them to the ‘highest’ version of themselves. It is the atheist’s belief that logic and science reveal the ultimate truths that guides and mediates their interaction with the world. It acts as the primal source of their motivations and actions.
So perhaps the essential function of belief is to provide a sense of meaning and purpose, acting as a psychological catalyst for action. As a sociological mechanism, it also has wider implications on social cohesion and group organisation. The world is flawed so the outcomes of this system are not always positive, but its intentions appear set towards a functional goal. When I examine the way that belief systems influence psyche and behaviour, I begin to wonder if ideologies are adopted by us, or if indeed we are adopted by them in order to carry out a specific function. I wonder if there’s not some sort of evolutionary force which carries out its agenda through the belief systems we adopt. If belief does have a psycho-socio-evolutionary function, then it doesn’t seem implausible. If our capacity to believe things was one of our more significant evolutionary advantages (which I’ll discuss next), then maybe nature has a plan when it comes to what we believe and why. After all, evolution has never gotten it wrong.
In order to understand this further, it important to look at the story of belief and the role it has played historically. In this instance, I’m looking at it as a psychological response to developing self-awareness in early humans. Basic self-awareness brings about a number of complex issues. One of the more prominent issues is the awareness of mortality and the finite nature of being. This is a hard pill to swallow, and an issue that the conscious mind (or the ego) cannot actually process. In this sense, self-awareness means having to grapple with tough abstract concepts pertaining to your existence. For our early ancestors who were already facing harsh biological and environmental realities, this way probably an unwelcome task. Our success as a species wasn’t due to our biological prowess or predatory strength, (which I’ll discuss in the next chapter), so we were under constant threat. The ways to combat this issue are to either try to return to unconsciousness, or to transcend into a higher form of consciousness. I got familiar with this concept during the depressive episode which led to my ‘spiritual awakening’. In typical human fashion, depression led to self-destruct in an attempt to become less conscious and numb to my thoughts. On the other hand, another part of me was trying to transcend those thoughts, which in the end lead to a deeper sense of self.
In Yuval Noah Harari’s bestseller ‘Sapiens’ he recounts the history of mankind and discusses some of the important developments that took place transforming homosapiens from primates on the plains of Africa, to the self-proclaimed ruling species on the planet in just thousands of years. If I try to imagine life before homosapiens evolved, I wouldn’t have put my money on a small primate being at the top of the food chain in several thousand years. There must have been other special qualities we developed which trumped our biological disadvantages. The most significant of developments linked directly to our success was our ability to create imagined realities, communicate them to one another, and believe them enough to organise ourselves based on those shared imagine realities. Not only do these include religious beliefs, but even fundamental ideas such as nation states, money, and human rights.
Human imagination gave rise to the possibility of belief, and therefore it remains at the core of our engagement in belief. Belief created an important organisational tool which contributed to the success of the species (Harari, 2014). The idea that a group is bound by one imagined reality creates the possibility for a shared value system in which all participants can be directed towards a common goal. It speaks to our innate tribalism and social nature. It also tackles some of the psychological issues we become confronted with when dealing with self-conscious beings.
But this all begs the question – where did these imagined realities spring from? What inspired them? It seems logical to ascertain that it would be elements in our environment, which inspired this. One school of thought suggests that the ‘the collective unconscious’, a term coined by psychoanalyst Carl Jung which refers to structures of the unconscious mind that are shared among beings of the same species, could be responsible for the creation of the earliest religious and mythological beliefs.
From the Jungian perspective, the collective unconscious is composed of archetypes which are ‘innate universal pre-conscious psychic dispositions’ that create the basis from which the rudimentary themes of human life emerge. They function to direct and influence human thought and behaviour. Jungian thought supports the idea that ‘the forms, structures and psychosocial functions of religion, myth, psyche and society, appear as the emergent constitutive elements of a unique and same psycho-socio-evolutionary process’ (Wilhelm, 2016). In this sense, the formation and integration of religious and mythological symbolism into the conscious mind of the collective, is directly linked to the psycho-social evolution of mankind. Anthony Stevens presents Jung’s archetypes as a ‘synthesising theme’ which may serve to unite the various scientific practices of genetics, neurophysiology, anthropology, socio-biology as a framework for ‘a unified science of humanity’ (Douglas 1985). Because of my own experiences with different beliefs, it seems plausible to me that the function of religion and myth is to alter the structure of psyche and society for evolutionary purposes.
---
Chaos and order are fundamental aspects of our reality and we’re constantly navigating between both states. Chaos represents the unknown. It represents nature and its creative and destructive power. Order represents that which is known. It represents the cultures we’ve created to help us navigate the chaos we are constantly faced with. To live is to constantly navigate the two. It’s in part, the act of transforming chaos into order; taking the unknown and making it familiar. Belief mediates this fundamental process by providing direction and a sense of safety. The chaos of the unknown can be extremely scary to confront, yet it’s something we all have to face. After all, one of the only inevitable facts about life is that we all have to die.
We need a mental framework to help navigate us through a task which is daunting, continuous and inevitable. On a personal level, belief transforms the chaotic, mysterious quality of life into a functional mental structure that acts simultaneously as a reference for meaning and purpose, and a source for action. In this sense, belief is an involuntary requirement of being. To be alive is to believe because our lives are enshrouded in mysteries we are perhaps fundamentally incapable of understanding.
Being open to ideas and experiences has helped me realise the plasticity of belief, and the profound effect it has on our minds and behaviour. Reflecting on my experiences and the significant role that belief has played in shaping human societies throughout history has allowed me to realise that on the whole, what you believe isn’t as important as your engagement in that belief (as long as your beliefs don’t encourage you to hurt others, of course). It’s humbling to conceptualise belief as a state of being because essentially, I’m accepting that I’ll remain in awe of life and eluded by its mystery. I’m accepting that no matter how much I know, there will always be more that I don’t know - and I think that’s a productive approach to take towards living.
References:
Douglas, C. (1985). Biology and Archetypal Theory. The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal, 5(4), 1-21. doi:10.1525/jung.1.1985.5.4.1
Harari, Y. (2014). Sapiens: A Brief History Of Humankind. Harper.
Kvanvig, J. L. (2003). The value of knowledge and the pursuit of understanding (Vol. 113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Millikan, R. G. (1984). Language, thought and other biological categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116
Williams, B. (1973). Deciding to believe. In B. Williams (Ed.), Problems of the Self (pp. 136–51). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.