[From Bob C. (990106.2320PT)]
This thread about "beliefs" has reminded me of something I've been
contemplating for some time which is how we come to (organize) believe,
perceive, understand, model, things which go on outside us or inside, which
are in contrast to what we want to believe.
I think there is a reality principle, and I know that Freud posited this many
moons ago, but if we forget psychoanalysis ever existed, I think the concept
fits technically into PCT.
What I mean by a reality principle is something that is innate and comes into
play very early in life and wants to know things as they were, are, and are
likely to be even if one does not have these words yet. Something which
notices the invariant of accuracy, fittingness, what makes sense, a curiosity
about what is, independent of what one wants to believe. I could make an
evolutionary case for this by saying that even if one does not like the
reality of a situation, it is more adaptive to act on accurate information.
Of course such perceptions organized under this principle can can also develop
over time into all of our more sophisticated ideas about how to scientifically
test reality.
Of course this principle often comes into conflict with what we want to
believe, there are times when it is very anxiety provoking (error increasing)
to believe things acording to a more accurate model, and there are times when
it is advantageous to misperceive things. Of course Clinton can not remember
things accurately, to do so would disturb his reference of maintaining the
presidency. It may be more likely that he can remember more of what actually
happened, but does not chose to do so publically, but it is not hard to
imagine people actually advantageously convincing themselves of
misperceptions. This is especially true about the past, because control only
works from the present onward, and because most people care very much about
what others think of them, they often tell stories about themselve to, as
William James put it, "be noticed favorably". I call this the marketing
department of the psyche.
I think the reality principle is there, but that it operates better in lower
error conditions, and gets overridden in higher error conditions. These over
riding forces are often called defenses. "defenses reduce anxiety." When
beliefs act in accord with the reality principle they act more as perceptions,
and change with changing data. When they serve other purposes, they likely
look more like references which resist disturbance.
It is not hard to imagine the purposes that religious beliefs serve. Comfort
provided by imaginging an all powerful caring being in a time of distress.
Reducing the anxiety of not existing after death. Of course these beliefs
resist disturbance. I imagine there have been many hard headed scientists
who pray to God when they near death and I'll probably be one of them.
I think that as man has become more technologically advanced (gained more
control), error has been reduced, which has allowed the reality principle to
come more into play with science displacing many religiously associated
beliefs.
Bob C.