Frequently asked questions
From Chains of Reason
Chains of Reason seems to assume that all beliefs are the product of cold logic, but isn't that obviously false?
Given that people are not born holding any beliefs, people must at some point make a conscious decision to hold each of the beliefs they sincerely hold. And any decision must, by definition, be the product of a decision-making process, and any decision-making process is a form of reasoning - and reasoning is logic performed by the mind.
For example, even someone who believes something simply because someone they greatly admire believes it, must have reasoned along the lines of:
- Premise 1
- X believes that people have been abducted from Earth by aliens.
- Premise 2
- X is usually right.
- Conclusion
- People have been abducted from Earth by aliens.
This is of course not to say that the person would have actually pictured the above argument in their head - the above is simply a formal way of presenting the kind of reasoning that must have occurred in their head at some level. The point is that even such 'unthinking' beliefs are the product of some reasoning - however basic, and however flawed - performed by the holder of the belief.
Even religious beliefs must be the product of 'cold logic', give that people are not born with them, and so must at some point consciously decide to hold them.
See: Chain 22: All sincerely held beliefs must be the product of logic.
If the chains are not required to be sound, and there is not even any attempt to distinguish between sound and unsound chains, then isn't Chains of Reason a waste of time?
Chains of Reason is not about establishing the soundness of any particular reasoning, but is simply about presenting reasoning as clearly and concisely as possible, with people left to decide for themselves whether the reasoning is sound or not (see What Chains of Reason is, and is not). If the reasoning behind a particular belief is unsound, and that unsoundness becomes obvious when presented on this site, then the site will help spread awareness of that unsoundness, and awareness of unsound reasoning can be just as valuable as awareness of sound reasoning.
Don't you think we should just automatically respect other people's sincerely held beliefs and not subject them to this kind of cold analysis?
This site is not disrespectful towards people's sincerely held beliefs. As stated in the previous answer, Chains of Reason is merely about presenting the reasoning behind particular beliefs as clearly and concisely as possible, leaving people to make their own assessment of the soundness of that reasoning. And analysing the reasoning behind a belief, in order to present that reasoning as clearly and concisely as possible, is surely not disrespectful to that belief.
