I read an article on psyblog entitled "Why You Can't Help Believing Everything You Read." In this article it talked about two hypothesis', one made by Descartes and another made by Baruch Spinoza.
Descartes' hypothesis was that understanding and believing things are two seperate processes. So, first people take in information that they read and then they process it and decide whether they believe it or not. However, Spinoza's thought was that understanding something was believing it.
In the experiment that was preformed it was found that Spinoza was infact correct, and that understanding is in fact believing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Do you agree with Spinoza? I don't. I don't think, just because I understand something, such as someone being pro-abortion, that I believe in it or agree with it whatsoever. Obviously, Spinoza knows much more than I do, but that's my personal opinion.
ReplyDeleteI don't really agree with that guy at all. You can understand something without believing it. This guy is a professional, so i feel dumb disagreeing with him, but Hannah's opinion is right, with that whole pro-abortion thing. Good artical though. This was interesting.
ReplyDelete