Irrational Beliefs

Irrational Beliefs

Must feel good
to believe you are right
all the time,

no room for colour
between black and white,
especially grey,

to throw science
out the window,
along with rational thought,

so convenient
a construction
for your tunnel vision,

if you believe it
it must be true,
it just feels right,

if it feels right
it must be true,

who can argue with that
lack of logic,
the inconvenient truth

is never welcome
by the faithful,
the flat earth society.

Wouldn’t want facts
to get in the way
of a good story.

22 thoughts on “Irrational Beliefs

Add yours

  1. Wouldn’t it be lov-er-ly to be able to think that way! The alternative is never a comfortable way to live and think (checking facts with various sources and trying to suss out their reliability).

    Emphasis on think.


    1. Probably part of the reason that way of thinking develops – makes a person feel comfortable and they can relax and not do any of the hard work of thinking about the pros and cons of an argument (why bother when you know the answer) – such luxury ;). Thanks d (can always count on a scientist).

  2. It is so easy for the hucksters in this world to sell people on any distorted array of ideas when they think this way…an excellent poem to my way of thinking.

    1. Thanks slpmartin – you just have to look at all the crap sold on the internet, that has no scientific backing on efficacy (that people swallow, hook, line and sinker – to the detriment of their wallets šŸ˜‰ )

  3. James Murdock was asked last week, “Are you familiar with the legal term Willful Deafness?”. Apparently it applies to people who could be reasonable to assumed to know something was happening but ‘turned a deaf ear’ becaue it was convenient not to know. In law, it is not a defence as we may have found, for example, if we parked in a non parking zone and neglected to check for signs. In such cases we are guilty.
    There followed a discussion on RN on the propensity of Humanity to use Wilful Defness in many aspects of llife to avoid questioning comfortable or convenient assumptions.
    Mentioned were religions, climate change (two of my favourites) politics, lovers, doctors and so on. Your name was not mentioned, so I guess you are what you seem… a bloody fine poet!

    1. Haha – thank you kindly Stafford – I seem to have come across a lot of people with that condition ‘wilful deafness’ and it’s not pretty (pretty embarrassing, but not pretty) – in fact the world appears to be full of them – it reminds me of family systems theory where you have a dysfunctional member and the whole system supports that member, because to change the whole system is too threatening (better to live with the dysfunction – they believe, often falsely – then to risk the system). This applies of course to climate change but all those other things you have mentioned.

  4. What do you suggest there Gabe,
    that I am wrong? That my ideas are false? That there is more than one truth? Mine?
    Do you say everyone else are right and I am wrong? How can that be?
    I demand (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) a prove.


    1. Not sure whether you are being facetious or not Dhyan – imo people can have their beliefs as long as they don’t impinge on other people; and the heavy weight of scientific evidence on a particular issue must be given credence and not dismissed because it does not fit in with a persons world view.

      1. Perhaps I am not sure my self. I guess i sin once in a while in what you have descried.
        I, too, believe that anyone can believe in what they want as long they don’t go on preaching it or forcing it on others.
        As for science – I would like to agree too, the problem these days is that too many so called scientific research are “custom made” or are trying to measure things in their system, therefore ignoring other possibilities. The more Knowledge is open for more people the more it is being “used”.

        1. I have sinned in this regard too Dhyan, particularly when I was younger šŸ˜‰ The thing about science is it is never about one or two articles or studies – it is an accumulation of evidence over time – the scientific process can be corrupted with enough money in some instances, but reputable scientific journals care most about their reputation and the reputations of the scientists who edit them, and the review of each study is done by referral to external experts who also want to maintain their reputations.

          1. they also care about keeping their society, I agree here. Yet combine with power-eager politicians and manipulated media – well.. I have some fears.
            The other thing just yet is what I said about their inability (at times) to look at things outside of their paradigms, which mean over looking certain things just because they don’t settle with current rules and understanding or cannot be measure with those standards. take for some example the story of the “patient from Berlin” (hiv story).

            1. I agree Dhyan – if you don’t look in an area, you won’t find any answers – I looked up the HIV story – I am sure there will be a mad scramble to investigate what happened there, as anyone who cures HIV will be a very happy person (and rich and …). There are problems with science but it offers the optimum structure to investigate hypotheses.

    1. There is a massive anti-science movement throughout the world, which is very worrying (not to mention going backward) and when scientists are getting death threats from the climate denialist movement – well what more can I say!

  5. What a timely piece. I think we ARE going backwards. Look what happened to Galileo. I would never have thought our present day scientists would be persecuted the way he was. I don’t know where that irrational belief way of thinking comes from. Is it fear? Is it ignorance? Is it a love of money blocking out common sense?

    Shame the earth isn’t flat – we could push all the irrational believers off the edge….

    1. Thanks Selma – unfortunately part of it is about money (and powerful people are funding a fear campaign about the carbon tax). The irony is that the anti-carbon tax movement (part of it) is called the Galileo Movement – which is hilarious, as they are the ones that are ignoring the scientific evidence (the consensus from climate sciencists that the global warming is caused primarily by humans) and cherry picking data to support what they want people to believe (the oldest trick in the statistical book of skullduggery). I think your average Joe in the streets (who write the way off the mark letters to the editor) are legitimately confused because of the systematic distribution of misleading information from the powers that don’t want change.

  6. I totally missed that but what the flying fudge? Do they – a conservative, I am a complete scientific ignoramus – group not see the irony in calling themselves the Galileo Movement? OMG. I am freaked out by that, Gabrielle. That they should sully such a great man’s name has shocked me. A man of forethought and vision who was branded a heretic and was totally anti-establishment is someone they are touting as their inspiration? Good grief. I don’t know what to think. What a bunch of dumbos.

    1. The song ‘thick as a brick’ springs to mind Selma šŸ˜‰ The ‘debate’ that is going down throughout Australia at the moment (reading letters to the editors is making me cringe) is so embarrassing and the high-up people speaking absolute crap, is mindblowing. And then someone like Malcom Turnbull, who speaks eloquently and factually about the issue – gets ignored by the media (do you want your ‘news limited’ – well it’s happening already – censorship! – thank God for twitter).

  7. I almost get the impression that this winged creature is giving a bit of a lecture! I am not very familiar with some of the goings on in Australia but believe the premise to be true on most fronts. Censorship can be helpful in some cases and not in others. I like how you have written this. I feel privy to alot more going on under the surface.

    1. Thanks for your comment Renee. I hadn’t realised how fitting the picture was, until your comment – even down to the colours (black, grey) – I picked it in a hurry. In the case of the censorship which I referred to in my previous comment, I am referring to newspapers who deliberately don’t include newsworthy items (it is their job after all to report the news) – and this was newsworthy. I agree with you that some forms of censorship are necessary in this world we live in, that’s for sure. Pity we can’t censor the people who spout innaccuracies about CO2 – like saying it’s a harmless gas, we breathe it out everday – haha – if it’s invisible it can’t be doing any harm – their logic is beyond bad!

  8. Good one, Gabrielle šŸ™‚ some believe what they will for many reasons – ignorance, fear, power, money, complacency, and will not counter debate under any circumstances – and Isuspecte that some suspect that they are wrong but don’t want to face up to that inconvenient truth – no wonder snake oil salesmen do such a roaring trade!

    1. You just can’t ague/debate with some people bluebee – they have closed their minds to an alternative viewpoint – that is the thing that really gets to me, about a lot of things, not just climate change – they are so convinced they are right about particular points and state them with such surety that it is quite breathtaking and you know not to bother even trying to convince them otherwise (what would be the point).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: