pull down to refresh

Yeah the body is a great analogy there. I guess to nitpick the issue is collection/storage of things that are not necessarily needed for the body to function as intended. Too much of something will kill the body. Adding things to the body it does not need (ie- that you want ) hastens our inevitable path to death.
So as you might agree then belief is like a festering cancer to the mind. Rejection of all belief might then result in being better adapted to the reality of one's situation such as an approaching predator or a sky being contaminated with metallic particulate.
If indeed rejection of all beliefs is the most prudent path then we could apply that to trade as well and thus remove all currency units from the equation since they represent a belief that the units will exchangeable at some point in the future. This takes us 'back' to a traditional real goods/services based barter system. And before someone says this is stoneage behavior what's to stop us from building sophisitcated technical improvements to an otherwise ancient tool like we did with money.
Anyway props to your last point as well - it's true no-one can understand-all and if the car drives faster, safer, smoother it's probably a better car regardless of what's under the hood.
Human civilization stands on belief though. Belief can be very beneficial in many scenarios. Removing it from money is helpful, but I'd find it hard to live without believing in anything – be it in my partner, family, culture, and so on. A society where all trust / belief / values / whatever are automated is a society of robots.
reply
Imagine if nobody 'believed' the media. So it's not just money where this would be useful.
In fact, human civilization as we know it seems to be crumbling around us - while being consolidated by a few.
Those few are managing the collapse. How do they do that? Because they have the masses believing things detrimental to their own potential. If the masses did not believe in things the few would not be able to manage the many.
I too would like to 'take a leap of faith' to my partner - you're right on that it's the one person you should believe in when it counts - and hopefully he/she will always be there to lend that hand. Not sure however I would believe a 6 year old or an alchoholic cousin so even amongst family belief is always a potential for detriment.
A society where all trust / belief / values / whatever are automated is a society of robots.
Agreed, belief in automation or delegated systems of trust is just as detrimental - removing belief entirely doesn't turn us into robots it makes us resilient to self destruction via third party.
reply