WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DESTROY A PERSON'S MISBELIEFS?
TO BUILD SOMETHING, WE MAY HAVE TO DESTROY SOMETHING ELSE, TRUE?
I HAVE SOME CONCERN HERE...
I have often been concerned about what happens when we destroy a false belief system that is actually providing some solace or safety or hope for a person.
What happens to the person who is holding onto a belief but all of a sudden loses the belief and the benefit of it?
Won't they be depressed or lost or more insecure?
Yes, I think they could be.
So, we have a dilemma here: Does installing or improving a belief system have more benefit to the individual than the cost of letting a "positive" misbelief go?
THE ADVANTAGE OF A CREDO PROVIDED FOR US
If other people make up something that is a comprehensive belief system in some way, they can be benefitting other people to the extent that it provides certainty and/or security and/or some other psychological benefit. So, therefore it is "good", at least in that way.
And it is certainly easier to take on an already constructed system than to create one for oneself and/or to go through the thinking and questioning that it takes.
BUT, WHAT IF IT CAUSES SOMETHING NEGATIVE...
I am not saying herein what is true or not true, per se, despite what you might infer from the discussion. I am just questioning and/or in "inquiry" about it.
If one believes that "God will take care of me", does that encourage a person to not be fully responsible for himself (and/or to have a victim mentality)? Certainly, since self-responsibility is the key to a successful, happy life, it must be harmful (or at least not as effective) to be dependent and leave it all up to someone or something or God to do it for you?
It would seem that if Entity A destroyed Person B's beliefs but Person B did not succeed in learning a new system that was equal or better, then it would be, on a net basis, a harmful thing to do - i.e. it would be unethical because it did not provide "greater good".
Accordingly, that entity would best do an assessment to estimate whether Person B will end up with a better belief system.
And that is the crux of the issue: being confident that the new belief system would be implemented to the extent that it provided a better "net" good.
ASSESSING THE RISK VERSUS THE PROBABLE BENEFIT
In an ideal world, we would like to have no losses and no tradeoffs, just benefits and gains. But, to build a building on the site of an existing building must involve some destruction in order to get the better building. Much in the real, physical world involves something being destroyed to create something anew - from old neurons to new neurons and neuronal pathways, from destroying some of one's spare time in order to learn how to be more effective, etc.
And, of course, when a "dogooder" wants to help someone, he is often mistaken in his overconfidence that he has "the answer" or at least something better. He could be wrong. So it is ethically imperative for him to become expert enough to know what he is doing, how things work, and what the results will likely be.
AND, THERE WILL BE ERRORS...
If I, as a "dogooder", embark on "interfering" or "impacting another" to create something better, I will sometimes not produce the desired result and even do some harm.
If I harm one person by a net of "2 units", but I help 10 other people by a net of "3 units", then surely, for the greater good, I am doing the right thing. But this conflicts with my other rule of "do no harm".
A philosopher, I suspect, would vote for doing the greater good. But there is no definitive answer that is right. Is abortion the right thing to do to improve the potential parents' lives or is it better to not terminate a potential life of 70-80 years? We can all have opinions, but there is no "right" answer (unless someone is deluding themselves and "being right" about it with no provable justifications).
SO, MY APPROACH WOULD BE...
My approach would be to do as much education upfront as it takes to have the person be able to embrace what is positive but not in conflict with the "good misbeliefs" and then, once the person has that base, have the person proceed to learn and question his own religious beliefs and/or new age beliefs. There is some risk in my being unsuccessul in persuading the other person to do what will benefit him/her, but I think the risk is worth the potential, expected gain.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
What do you think? (I said "think", so please do not respond with reactivity or anger.)
