RE: Rejecting Reality? Maybe You're Engaging in Cognitive Dissonance!
Speaking of ego-identification, I encountered someone on steemit and commented on their post where I tried to elaborate on the duality between ego-personality-identity construct and selflessness on one side, with a more developed concern for others and altruism on the other, but they weren't having it, thinking the ego isn't tied to selfishness (ego=I=self...LOL), that if you mention the ego then you are talking about egotism and not selfishness... You can read more of that here.
And in other post, then they expressed how they accept moral relativism! Oy! I know you know Mark Passio's work, so you will likely appreciate reading how I explained how confused this person was. Here is how it developed because I brought up how morality and truth valuation is what I can argue "makes us human", not simply belief that "makes us human".
"krnel: Do you think morality, right and wrong, are simply the whims of our social environmental conditioning that have us believe something is right or wrong for some people while it differs for others?"
"Response: ofcource @krnel
For example Inuits of Canada sometimes eat their first born in the winter if they run out of food. Muslims stone people for punishment. Ancient Egyptians used to have sex with the dead.
Morality is just what a group a people decided to arbitrarily do in a specific place, under a specific timeframe. The most classic one is murder. If you are in war you are allowed to kill and crowned hero. If you are not in war you are a murderer."
You can see my full response here.
Take care. Peace!
I've found it's best to ask, "Why?" Like "Why do people still believe the lies?" Is it cognitive dissonance? Is it confirmation bias? Is it belief perseverance?
["Beliefs can survive potent logical or empirical challenges. They can survive and even be bolstered by evidence that most uncommitted observers would agree logically demands some weakening of such beliefs. They can even survive the total destruction of their original evidential bases."] - Lee Ross and Craig Anderson.
So how can one counteract that? It seems that no matter how much effort one invests their time and attention in attempting to encourage others to open their own minds to the possibility that they could be wrong...in the end it probably still won't have any effect....and even worse, have the opposite effect. The struggle is real, my friend. I can attest to that. I can't begin to tell you how many times I felt like giving up and giving in. I take breaks, but I can't stop all together.
Larken Rose comes up with some good analogies to explain how ridiculous moral relativism is. Speaking of Larken, I can't wait for "The Mirror" to hit the web. I think it will be great for people to witness their own inconsistent thought processes.
I'm pretty sure most people want to be correct when they speak and take action...it's just they've been misled since they could walk and talk.....as well as their parents, and their parents before them.
The social engineers of past and present have improved upon the human slavery condition to the point of it being almost unrecognizable.
Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" is a great parable that I'm sure you're familiar with. A somewhat simplistic explanation of how it actually is.
I'll always care to share there's no fear in love with truth. Thanks for not giving up and giving in. Peace!
"the opposite effect"
Yes, the backfire effect. Hehehe.
https://steemit.com/consciousness/@krnel/reality-vs-perception-reality-processing
Well Larken himself is attached to his way of life, and how things have been done, and doesn't face some realities of morality unfortunately, yet Mark Passio does. BUt I'm sure it will be good overall anyways.
Thanks for supporting my work. Take care. Peace.