Exclusión del Debito Fiscal IVA de la Base Imponible del IT

Philosopher Alfred Korzybski observed, “there are two ways to slide easily through life: to believe everything or to doubt everything—both ways save us from thinking.” To believe everything we are told is to be gullible. To doubt everything is to be skeptical.

An alternative to gullibility and skepticism is questioning. This means greeting all ideas with curiosity and wonder, judging none of them in advance, and being equally prepared to find wisdom, foolishness, or some combination of the two.

Errors of perception

137

Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

THE STORY OF PAUL VITZ

Paul C. Vitz is a professor of psychology and the author of many articles and several books, including Faith of the Fatherless: The Psychology of Atheism. The story behind this book illustrates how a simple question can lead to new insights.

For much of his life, Vitz had been an atheist, but at age 38 he em- braced religion and became interested in the historic tension between psychology and religion. He learned that “even in intellectual and academic circles, atheism did not become respectable until about 1870 . . . and it continued to be restricted to small numbers of intellectuals into the twentieth century.” From his training as a psychologist he also knew that “many atheists are famous for arguing that [religious] believers suffer from illusions, from unconscious and infantile needs, and from other psychological deficits.” Freud, for example, argued that belief in God is nothing more than a projection of the believer’s desire for security.

As he reflected on these facts, he began to wonder whether this “projection the- ory” might apply to atheists as well as to believers, or perhaps even apply better to atheists than to believers. Eager to find out, he decided to study the lives of famous atheists and famous religious believers and see if any interesting patterns emerged. The atheists he chose included Freud, Nietzsche, Hume, and Sartre; the theists included Pascal, Berkeley, de Tocqueville, Kierkegaard, and Buber.

This study revealed that every famous atheist had a weak, dead, or abusive father, and almost every theist had a positive relationship with his father. After analyzing the data, Vitz concluded that the projection theory of religious belief is not only unscientific but also a form of the error in thinking known as ad hominem— in other words, it focuses on the believer personally rather than on the evidence for and/or against religious belief.

Vitz writes as follows: “Since both believers and nonbelievers in God have psychological reasons for their positions, one important conclusion is that in any debate as to the truth of the existence of God, psychology should be irrelevant. A genuine search for evidence supporting, or opposing, the existence of God should be based on the evidence and arguments found in philosophy, theology, science, history, and other relevant disciplines. It should also include an understanding of religious experience.”

Paul Vitz’s research could pave the way for a more scholarly approach to the study of religion.

For more information on Paul Vitz, see Paul Vitz, Faith of the Fatherless: The Psychology of Atheism (Dallas, TX: Spence Publishing Co., 1999).

Preconceptions

A preconception about the majority or the minority.Preconception tends to follow our affections. If we feel more comfortable with the majority on our side, we may take for granted that the majority view is correct. If we identify with the underdog and love the challenge of con- fronting superior numbers, we may make the same assumption about the minority view.

Each of these choices can occur with little or no awareness that we are making up our minds in advance. And in each case we put feelings of comfort and personal preference above the evidence. Critical thinking means deciding issues on their merits rather than on the number or the celebrity status of the people on the opposing sides.

A preconceived view of change.According to an old joke, conserva- tives have never met a new idea they liked, and liberals have never met a new idea they didn’t like. Each observation contains an element of truth.

Some people find even small changes, like returning home from school and finding the furniture rearranged, very upsetting. Major changes, like moving across the country, can be even more disturbing.

New ideas can have a similar effect on such people. Old beliefs provide a sense of comfort and security. When those beliefs are challenged, peo- ple may feel that reality has been pulled out from under them. That’s probably why ancient rulers killed the bearers of bad news. It’s also one reason why persuading others can be difficult.

Unfavorable preconceptions about change may be older and more common than favorable ones. Yet the latter seem to be increasing today, perhaps because technology is advancing so rapidly. Some people think that old ideas, old beliefs, and old values are of little use today. For them, new is always better.

Neither perspective is consistent with critical thinking. Some new ideas are clearly better than the old ones they replace. Progress has in fact occurred in every area of life, including science, technology, education, and government. Yet this reality has another, less beneficial side. New ideas can contain serious flaws that go unnoticed at first. Time and experience can prove that the supposed great leap forward was actually several steps backward.

To avoid preconceptions about change, know your own mental habits. Also resist the temptation to accept first impressions.