Sincere and sufficient effort

@fmf said
"Charitable"?

This is what is meant by it.

"In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker's statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation.[1] In its narrowest sense, the goal of this methodological principle is to avoid attributing irrationality, logical fallacies, or falsehoods to the others' statements, when a coherent, rational interpretation of the statements is available. According to Simon Blackburn[2] "it constrains the interpreter to maximize the truth or rationality in the subject's sayings.""

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

@fmf said
The crux of question, which your answer doesn't quite address, is this: What would you say constitutes a sufficient effort?

I stated in reply to your question...

"Once the person has made the effort to understand the internal logic, and has been charitable to that logic, I think it is safe to say that they have made a sincere effort."

I believe it was implied that I believe this would meet the criteria of sufficiency because it was in direct reply to the question.

So, now you k ow, for sure, that that was what I intended to communicate.

@philokalia said
I stated in reply to your question...

"Once the person has made the effort to understand the internal logic, and has been charitable to that logic, I think it is safe to say that they have made a sincere effort."

I believe it was implied that I believe this would meet the criteria of sufficiency because it was in direct reply to the question.

So, now you k ow, for sure, that that was what I intended to communicate.

How many days or months, for example?

@fmf said
How many days or months, for example?

Are you asking... how many days or months of effort towards understanding the internal logic of another person or idea must be invested..?

@philokalia said
Are you asking... how many days or months of effort towards understanding the internal logic of another person or idea must be invested..?

For example, how long do you think someone should examine Christianity [while not finding it credible and not developing "faith"] before deciding that one has given it a chance based on sincere and sufficient effort?

@fmf said
For example, how long do you think someone should examine Christianity [while not finding it credible and not developing "faith"] before deciding that one has given it a chance based on sincere and sufficient effort?

I don't know.

I don't think about things that way.

I have to constantly evaluate things by their internal logic and make an effort to understand them. I don't try to turn it off or anything.

Did you turn it off?

Or are you actually talking about like... something else?

@philokalia said
I don't know.

I don't think about things that way.

I understand. Thanks.

@philokalia said
I have to constantly evaluate things by their internal logic and make an effort to understand them. I don't try to turn it off or anything.

Did you turn it off?

Or are you actually talking about like... something else?

If this means you are currently in the process of giving all religions a suitably sincere and sufficient chance in terms of what you are learning and understanding about their beliefs, then so be it. How long has that been going on, I wonder.

@fmf said
If this means you are currently in the process of giving all religions a suitably sincere and sufficient chance in terms of what you are learning and understanding about their beliefs, then so be it. How long has that been going on, I wonder.

I am not sure if it is right to think of these things as constant efforts that have to be turned on and off.

I think of it just as a way of looking at the world.

But it would be accurate to say that there are times at which we give ourselves more over to the way of thinking of another, and other times when we are more hardened to it.

But... I feel like I still try to actively think about things in Hindu terms (as much as I can) whenever I am reading something about Indian thought, and to try to see it as meritorious in itself.

I am a big believer in what Aristotle said:

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

@philokalia said
I am not sure if it is right to think of these things as constant efforts that have to be turned on and off.

How many years of looking at Islam would you say was a sincere and sufficient effort to give it an opportunity to convince you? Or would it be a matter of months?

@fmf said
How many years of looking at Islam would you say was a sincere and sufficient effort to give it an opportunity to convince you? Or would it be a matter of months?

I suppose after someone has looked at the Koran and interacted with some Islamic apologetics, and had done so thinking to themselves about the possibility o fbecoming a Muslim... It could be said that they did a sufficient effort.

But this is also subjective, and perhaps a bit silly.

It is actually difficult to have people interested enough in [i]their own religion to really give it a chance.

But let's not blame anyone for that... We all have different interests and have to invest a lot of time just into sustaining themselves.

@philokalia said
But let's not blame anyone for that... We all have different interests and have to invest a lot of time just into sustaining themselves.

It's one of the go-to arguments I encounter here - used by the likes of KellyJay, SecondSon, josephw, sonship, galveston75, RJHinds, and many others down through the years - when I have talked about some far-fetched Christian idea or other [to my way of thinking, anyway] with my loss of faith there in the background.

It's remarkable how often variants of this assertion come up [as if it's on a checklist]: '...you have rejected Christianity out of hand, if you made a sincere effort and gave it more time you would become a believer [again]...'. It seems silly to me.

So, the question obviously arises [and the above assertion was deployed again the other day and that's what triggered this]: What would you say constitutes a sincere and sufficient effort by someone to understand and consider adopting your Christian beliefs?

@fmf said
It's one of the go-to arguments I encounter here - used by the likes of KellyJay, SecondSon, josephw, sonship, galveston75, RJHinds, and many others down through the years - when I have talked about some far-fetched Christian idea or other [to my way of thinking, anyway] with my loss of faith is there in the background.

It's remarkable how often variants of this assertion com ...[text shortened]... sincere and sufficient effort by someone to understand and consider adopting your Christian beliefs?

I guess one of the reason's why this is difficult is because some aspects of it cannot be measured.

There are people who dislike Islam extremely that have read the Koran and all of the major hadiths, yet still they would not be seen as folks who have put forward sincere and suffiicent effort because the basis of their efforts in exploring the Koran & the Hadiths was to dismantle them. I am sure there are people who have dealt with the Bible and Christianity in similar terms.

Which is why I have put the focus on the concept of seeing the world through the eyes of the believer and attempting to really understand the internal logic charitably.

Do you think you have done that for Christianity? Of course, as a former believer, it could perhaps be said that you spent a long time where this was your reality. Yet, at some point, you left it.

It is said that a person can end up leaving the faith not necessarily because they have legitimately seen the faith to be in error due to it being illogical, it is still rooted in that person's individual vices. For instance, Evagrios the Solitary spoke about how pride & self-esteem (as it was translated)...

Here is an interesting passage on the demon of being obtuse:

10. Now what am I to say about the demon who makes the soul obtuse? For I am afraid to write about him: how, at his approach, the soul departs from its own proper state and strips itself of reverence and the fear of God, no longer regarding sin as sin, or wickedness as wickedness; it looks on judgment and the eternal punishment of hell as mere words: it laughs at the fire which causes the earth to tremble; and, while supposedly confessing God, it has no understanding of His commandments. You may beat your breast as such a soul draws near to sin, but it takes no notice. You recite from the Scripture, yet it is wholly indifferent and will not hear. You point out its shame and disgrace among men, and it ignores you, like a pig that closes its eyes and charges through a fence. This demon gets into the soul by way of long-continuing thoughts of self-esteem; and unless 'those days are shortened, no flesh will be saved' (Matt. 24:22).

This is one of those demons that seldom approach brethren living in a community. The reason is clear: when people round us fall into misfortune, or are afflicted by illness, or are suffering in prison, or meet sudden death, this demon is driven out; for the soul has only to experience even a little compunction or compassion and the callousness caused by the demon is dissolved. We solitaries lack these things, because we live in the wilderness and sickness is rare among us. It was to banish this demon especially that the Lord enjoined us in the Gospels to call on the sick and visit those in prison. For 'I was sick,' He says, 'and you visited Me' (Matt. 25:36). But you should know this: if an anchorite falls in with this demon, yet does not admit unchaste thoughts or leave his cell out of listlessness, this means he has received the patience and self-restraint that come from heaven, and is blessed with dispassion. Those, on the other hand, who profess to practice godliness, yet choose to have dealings with people of the world, should be on their guard against this demon. I feel ashamed to say or write more about him.
---
13. In the whole range of evil thoughts, none is richer in resources than self-esteem; for it is to be found almost everywhere, and like some cunning traitor in a city it opens the gates to all the demons. So it greatly debases the intellect of the solitary, filling it with many words and notions, and polluting the prayers through which he is trying to heal all the wounds of his soul. All the other demons, when defeated, combine to increase the strength of this evil thought: and through the gateway of self-esteem they all gain entry into the soul, thus making a man's last state worse than his first (cf Matt. 12:45). Self-esteem gives rise in turn to pride, which cast down from heaven to earth the highest of the angels, the seal of God's likeness and the crown of all beauty. So turn quickly away from pride and do not dally with it, in case you surrender your life to others and your substance to the merciless (cf. Prov. 5:9 demon is driven away by intense prayer and by not doing or saying anything that contributes to the sense of your own importance.

Bishop of Diokleia Kallistos. The Philokalia . Kindle Edition.

Some of this may be pertinent because the demon of self-esteem can cause someone to become obtuse through thinking that they can adequately reconnect everything back to its sources and causes without understanding it in the context of God.

It turns into a situation where the person perahsp takes too much pride in their alleged understanding of the world and thus denies the veracity of the claims of the Church in favor of their own explanations (and the explanations of other intellectuals that affirm their own).

I think it feeds directly into a sense of pride.

@philokalia said
I guess one of the reason's why this is difficult is because some aspects of it cannot be measured.

There are people who dislike Islam extremely that have read the Koran and all of the major hadiths, yet still they would not be seen as folks who have put forward sincere and suffiicent effort because the basis of their efforts in exploring the Koran & the Hadiths was to ...[text shortened]... of other intellectuals that affirm their own).

I think it feeds directly into a sense of pride.

I just find the 'argument' I mentioned to be silly and grasping, that's all. It may have something to do with the "self-esteem" of the believers who employ it in a conversation with an ex-believer, it's a point worth considering.

@philokalia said
It turns into a situation where the person perahsp takes too much pride in their alleged understanding of the world and thus denies the veracity of the claims of the Church in favor of their own explanations (and the explanations of other intellectuals that affirm their own).

If things like their pride and the condition/needs of their self-esteem contribute to someone continuing to subscribe to the alleged veracity of the claims of whatever Church they happen to be a member of - and "intellectuals" attendant thereto - it doesn't strike me as surprising, human condition-wise. If it gives someone a sense of purpose in life and a sense of belonging [to some congregation or other], and helps them live a morally sound life, it seems to me to be a positive thing.