bcuzbcuz wrote:The mere fact of asking the question defines the outcome. One might as well ask the question, "Am I fat?" If you need to ask the question, you already know the answer. (Yes, it feels good when someone answers in the negative, but the joy is shortlived.) The question then gets repeated. In regards to faith, the question gets repeated over and over until you convince yourself of the answer you want to hear.
This is all really helpful, thanks. I have been reading an article on self-persuasion and they are talking about the same thing here.
Motivated hypothesis testing. The desired attitude [faith]
may be achieved when salient motivations inspire
people to form and test particular hypotheses (Kunda &
Oleson, 1995). For example, people who desire to see
themselves as introverted [or "a believer"] should be likely to test the
hypothesis that they are introverted [have a testimony]. As described by
Kunda and Oleson (1995), this motivated selection of
hypotheses is important because people tend to test
hypotheses by looking for evidence that supports them
(Klayman & Ha, 1987).
For example, people who have
been motivated to see themselves as introverted [having a testimony] are more
likely to recall their introverted behaviors [spiritual experience] and less likely
to recall their extroverted behaviors [doubtful experiences] than are people who
have been motivated to see themselves as [non-believers].
(Sanitioso, Kunda, & Fong, 1990).
Maio and Thomas use the example of introvert and extrovert but I think it works the same way with faith. Moroni's challenge of asking god "if this church is true" is setting up oneself for the desired answer. Either you get the answer that it's true, or you get no answer. But the possibility of getting a affirmative "no, it's not true" is completely impossible. This must be some kind of logical fallacy...
Thoughts?
Quoted: Maio and Thomas: The Epistemic-Teleologic Model of Deliberate Self-Persuasion Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2007 11: 46