Self-Monitoring Against Irrationality
I am putting very much emphasis on finding a mindmate, who is rational and void of any kind of belief. Believing claims without doubt, no matter what the claims are, makes a man incompatible and a hazard.
While I am looking for a man, whom I can accept as he is, when we meet, and not as raw material to change, adapting to each other implies reciprocally changing disturbing habits by giving and accepting support.
But beliefs are a different matter and worse than bad habits. When someone temporarily and superficially appears to be an atheist and skeptic, but it is only skin deep, then sooner of later he will relapse to needing beliefs as a crutch, and then his behavior is determined by the power of his beliefs. If the faculty to be rational is lacking in his brain, then someone cannot be influenced by rational discussions and no caring support can replace the crutch.
In entry 364 I have already explained, that a man, whose behavior is determined by his beliefs and who cannot be influenced rationality is a big hazard to a rational woman, who would be the helpless target of his behavior. Such a man is neither reliable nor predictable. There are very good reasons to shun away from all believers, no matter in what. Whatever advantage the believer has for himself, there is no advantage from his belief for a partner, only disadvantages and hazards.
Without the faculty for rationality in the brain, believers are doomed to continue being determined by their beliefs.
Those, whose dormant rationality has only been overridden by either a need for a belief or childhood brainwashing are in an unfortunate situation. Since the believing majority of the population has established the insanity of believing preposterous nonsense as the normative baseline (entry 369), beliefs get reinforced, but doubting is discouraged. Not even the most stupid of beliefs are ever generally scorned or ridiculed enough to make anybody feel ashamed of having and admitting them. Doubts about any belief need to overcome a high threshold, before a person can discard it.
Overcoming beliefs has to be triggered and initiated by the person's own inner mental process. Nobody can cure a believer from his affliction, as long as he wants to continue believing, support can only help to enhance doubts, but the doubts need to come from inside.
I am putting very much emphasis on finding a mindmate, who is rational and void of any kind of belief. Believing claims without doubt, no matter what the claims are, makes a man incompatible and a hazard.
While I am looking for a man, whom I can accept as he is, when we meet, and not as raw material to change, adapting to each other implies reciprocally changing disturbing habits by giving and accepting support.
But beliefs are a different matter and worse than bad habits. When someone temporarily and superficially appears to be an atheist and skeptic, but it is only skin deep, then sooner of later he will relapse to needing beliefs as a crutch, and then his behavior is determined by the power of his beliefs. If the faculty to be rational is lacking in his brain, then someone cannot be influenced by rational discussions and no caring support can replace the crutch.
In entry 364 I have already explained, that a man, whose behavior is determined by his beliefs and who cannot be influenced rationality is a big hazard to a rational woman, who would be the helpless target of his behavior. Such a man is neither reliable nor predictable. There are very good reasons to shun away from all believers, no matter in what. Whatever advantage the believer has for himself, there is no advantage from his belief for a partner, only disadvantages and hazards.
Without the faculty for rationality in the brain, believers are doomed to continue being determined by their beliefs.
Those, whose dormant rationality has only been overridden by either a need for a belief or childhood brainwashing are in an unfortunate situation. Since the believing majority of the population has established the insanity of believing preposterous nonsense as the normative baseline (entry 369), beliefs get reinforced, but doubting is discouraged. Not even the most stupid of beliefs are ever generally scorned or ridiculed enough to make anybody feel ashamed of having and admitting them. Doubts about any belief need to overcome a high threshold, before a person can discard it.
Overcoming beliefs has to be triggered and initiated by the person's own inner mental process. Nobody can cure a believer from his affliction, as long as he wants to continue believing, support can only help to enhance doubts, but the doubts need to come from inside.
- It can be a sudden awakening by a shock, someone being disappointed by a deity.
- It can be the slow awakening along with the growing rationality as a guidance of life.
Most sources on the web claim, that the subconscious mind is irrational and illogical. Already in entry 368 I disagreed with this notion. The subconscious mind produces many of the premises, that the conscious mind needs for making decisions, emotions, sensations, signals of dishomeostasis, memories including contingencies and pseudocontingencies, and it also sometimes produces conclusions reaching the conscious mind as intuition.
As a result, the subconscious mind produces impulses to behave, but the conscious mind can act upon the impulses or decide not to allow them.
There is only one force in the subconscious mind, that is detrimental and hazardous, but evolutionarily logical. It is the imperative to react by animal instinct to the premises.
The subconscious mind commands 'breed', the conscious mind is able to know, that being childfree is a better life. The subconscious mind commands 'eat', the conscious mind knows, that restricting the intake of food is healthier.
I am convinced that the reasoning in the subconscious depends as much on the rational faculties of the brain as the conscious reasoning. If someone lacks the faculty for rationality and for consequencity, then the conscious behavior is as irrational as the subconscious impulses.
The subconscious mind produces impulses to behave. Sometimes people
- are not even aware, but act automatically by impulse.
- repress impulses before getting aware.
- follow impulses without knowing why.
- rationally evaluate impulses before acting.
Rationality enables people to use a very powerful method to avoid detrimental behavior by impulses, and to ascertain consistency and congruence between the behavior and the cognition.
This method is self-monitoring:
- Attempting to get aware of every impulse before acting.
- Asking questions like these:
Why do I want to do this?
What do I sense or feel, that is triggering this impulse?
Do I consciously have or do I need information, that the impulse has omitted?
Does the impulse lead to behavior, that is consistent with my values and my long term goals?
Are there options of more suitable behavior?
Does the impulse consider the fair deal with a significant other?
Self-monitoring helps to become less a robot driven by instincts, but it also helps to avoid being driven by ludicrous beliefs.
Self monitoring can become a habit and easier over time. But of course it has its limits. It is much easier to do it when there is an impulse for a proactive behavior and no pressure. When there is pressure to react under stress or in emotionally extreme situations, then one is often compelled to follow the impulse. But asking the questions afterwards helps to understand the dynamics of conflicts and to learn from it.
