That Which Is Real Does Not Require Belief

Today's somewhat flawed premise (I say "somewhat flawed" because the argument tends to hold water unless examined too closely, after which is falls apart) is that "That Which Is Real Does Not Require Belief". That is, if one must believe in something for it to exist, then it does not really exist, since lack of belief would lead to lack of existence.

This flawed argument can be applied across a multitude of disciplines, aggravating all who take it too seriously. To wit, here are some examples to help clarify the proposition:

Things That Exist Regardless of Belief:

• The wet qualities of water
• The elliptical motion of the earth as it orbits around the sun
• The Macro- and Micro-evolution of organisms on planet earth.
• The efficacy of aloe vera in soothing sunburns
• Human Intelligence (and lack thereof, in some individuals)
  
• The dramatic change in the earth's climate caused by man's pollution and neglect of their place in nature
• Mathematics and all disciplines that stem from it

Now, the idea here is simple (if you haven't caught on already): the above examples exist whether or not one believes them to exist. I can stop believing in evolution and global climate change, but they still most definitely exist. I can proclaim that I do not believe that pi does not equal 3.14, but it still will. Water is wet, the sky is blue, oceans are deep, etc. These things do not require belief; not believing will not cause water to be like sandpaper, the earth to rotate around the sun in a rectangular pattern, etc.

Those of you who know me know exactly where I'm going with this.

Things That Cease To Exist Without Belief In Them:

• Homeopathy
• Gods (anyone want to make the case for existence of Thor, Zeus, Hera, or Kali?)
• Truth
• Vampires (Bram Stoker-style, not the clinical pathology of drinking blood)
• Hope, Love, Hate, Jealousy...emotions in general, really
• Astrology
• Spell-casting, Prayer, Divining, and other summons of supernatural powers

Obviously, these examples would anger, annoy, offend, or otherwise put off the majority of people out there. The good reader would question why I would put Vampires and Spell-Casting with Love, Truth, and God.

Well, would not all of the above examples cease to be without someone believing in them? I can go down the list and show that each of these points simply are not "real" in the same way mathematics, gravity, and aloe vera are.

Think about it.

Emotions, though felt very vividly by everyone, aren't necessarily real. They're only real to you. One can act based on emotion, and the actions are real; but emotions themselves are not. "Hey, wait a minute," says the reader, "emotions can be traced to electrical activity in the brain. Emotions can be measured, induced, and controlled by external functions. Does that not make emotions real, that they exist?" Hey, buddy, I told you this was a flawed arguement that doesn't hold up upon close examination. What were you expecting? You were warned!

See if you can find the logical workarounds to the the "Not Real Without Belief" list above, WITHOUT falling into Cognitive Dissonance traps (that's the hard part!). Try to reconcile what you perceive to be reality, with what can be proven to be without you having to will it so.

Ain't metaphysics fun?