It’s fashionable to say that people should try to be less certain about things. That could be the certainty of scientists, teachers, political extremists or religious fundamentalists. But their certainty is their strength, and the truth of their beliefs is not relevant to their success. A strongly held belief is more likely to propagate that a weakly held one.

As an example, the Israel/Arab conflict has always been driven by the extremists on both sides. On the occasions that the moderate voices have come to power, one extreme or the other has committed an atrocity which destroyed any attempt at reconciliation. This pattern has been repeated since before the state of Israel was created.

The extremes are aggressive. The moderates are, well, moderate. You can’t scream moderation. You can’t fight and kill for moderation. You can’t intimidate people into moderation. Maybe the best we can do is to try to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Extremist have to close their minds. Ask an atheist fundamentalist (think Dawkins) to consider that there is some value to religious belief, that it works for some people. You know what Dawkins’ answer would be. And ask a creationist to consider that their basic beliefs might exclude a more general understanding of the world. Ditto. They can’t both be right. On any topic, given the number and variety of strongly held beliefs, you’d have to conclude that the sensation of being right is misleading for most people, if not all.

Richard Dawkins compared an idea to a virus, and came up with the concept of the idea of the meme — a self-propagating idea that carries its own means of reproduction. This idea was originally intended as an explanation for the survival of religious ideas. Ironically, the atheism Dawkins promotes can also be seen as a meme, as can the concept of meme itself.

We don’t think of a virus as being true or false, good or bad. We think about its effects, and how infectious it is. It’s just a bit of protein, it has no moral value. Dawkins is saying that ideas are similar to viruses, that they survive because they are infectious, not because they are true. It follows that belief is a symptom of infection. Belief in an idea is not evidence that the idea is true. The strange thing is that most of us have have never thought about the majority of ideas that we’re infected with, but we believe them to be true.

We are all brought up with a shitload of beliefs. <em>You should wash your hands after using the toilet. Put the milk in before the tea. Don’t eat bacon. The tooth fairy. Santa. Don’t kill people. Don’t talk with your mouth full. Put the forks pointing down in the dishwasher. 1+1=2. Don’t play with those kids down the road. Say “Garrarj”, not “Garridge.”</em> Some of these beliefs are vital to the ease and safety of life. Some are baseless. Some ideas are used to exploit the people who are infected by them (for example, the idea that diamonds are valuable and must be given as an engagement ring was created by De Beers in a pre-war ad campaign.) Most people work out that the tooth fairy and Santa Claus don’t exist. But most people retain beliefs that have they have never thought about.

How many beliefs do I hold, whose justification is “because it just is”? Or because some authority (parents, teachers, clerics, celebrities, politicians) told me it was so? How many ideas do I believe without ever having considered them? It’s a scary question, and one that most people avoid.

In this sense, enlightenment is not about waking up to the truth, but rather waking up to falsehood.

So what happens when I consider a belief? I could conclude that it’s just wrong. I could find that it is justified by some other core beliefs (axioms) that I had previously considered. I could find that there’s no justification for the belief but it’s useful anyway. Whatever, I might try to feel less certain about it.