Inquiring about my beliefs

Through my readings, I have been learning more and more each day. The passages I read are uplifting, as they are helping me understand my experiences more and more. 

Peirce has taught me that there are four methods of reestablishing belief, also known as methods of inquiry. We use these methods of inquiry when we experience doubt surrounding our beliefs. Methods of inquiry allow us to reestablish our beliefs.The four methods are tenacity, authority, a priori, and scientific. Peirce finds the scientific method to be the most effective method of inquiry.

I have discussed tenacity in my previous entry, so I will focus on the other methods now. 

The method of authority is troubling to me. A belief is set in place when an authoritative figure, as well as those around us share a belief. The belief is not questioned, but may be different across cultures. When one doubts the beliefs they hold, they look to someone or something in an authoritative position to reform, and be responsible for their new beliefs. One of the biggest problems with this method is that if you don't agree with their beliefs, changing your mind is difficult. For example, authority figures here in Syria feel that young men such as myself should be soldiers to fight in the civil war. I do not agree with their belief, and still wish to flee to another country. 

The next method is a priori. A priori is a belief guided by experience and rationality. Peirce wrote "we have examined into this a priori method as something which promised to deliver our opinions from their accidental and capricious element" (Peirce 1877, 9). This method suggests holding on to a belief because it seems agreeable to reason, and it fits with our current beliefs. This is problematic because many may simply believe something because it is convenient. I have thought a lot about my current situation, and do not feel I am simply holding on to my belief that my family must leave because it is convenient. I feel that leaving is the most rational option for my family and I. 

Lastly, there is the scientific method. Peirce mentions that the scientific method "is the only one of four methods which presents any distinction of a right and a wrong way" (Peirce 1877, 10). The scientific method suggests that our beliefs are based off measurements that are outside of people, their minds, or their cultures. Essentially, to free ourselves of doubt surrounding our beliefs using this method, we form a hypothesis and test it. Our hypothesis would be our belief. While I have not yet tested my hypothesis, I hope to rid myself of doubt and prove that leaving Syria will be beneficial to my family and I. 

These methods of inquiry are all methods that assist us in overcoming doubt. I will include a quote from Peirce's writings that I feel can help in understanding why I plan to eliminate my doubts using the scientific method:
"If I adopt the method of tenacity, and shut myself out from all influences, whatever I think necessary to doing this, is necessary according to that method. So with the method of authority: the state may try to put down heresy by means which, from a scientific point of view, seem very ill-calculated to accomplish its purposes; but the only test on that method is what the state thinks; so that it cannot pursue the method wrongly. So with the a priori method. The very essence of it is to think as one is inclined to think. All metaphysicians will be sure to do that, however they may be inclined to judge each other to be perversely wrong. The Hegelian system recognizes every natural tendency of thought as logical, although it be certain to be abolished by counter-tendencies. Hegel thinks there is a regular system in the succession of these tendencies, in consequence of which, after drifting one way and the other for a long time, opinion will at last go right. And it is true that metaphysicians do get the right ideas at last; Hegel's system of Nature represents tolerably the science of his day; and one may be sure that whatever scientific investigation shall have put out of doubt will presently receive a priori demonstration on the part of the metaphysicians. But with the scientific method the case is different. I may start with known and observed facts to proceed to the unknown; and yet the rules which I follow in doing so may not be such as investigation would approve. The test of whether I am truly following the method is not an immediate appeal to my feelings and purposes, but, on the contrary, itself involves the application of the method. Hence it is that bad reasoning as well as good reasoning is possible; and this fact is the foundation of the practical side of logic" (Peirce 1877, 10-11).

 
The photo I have chosen for this week's entry is a photo of myself. I have done a lot of thinking lately, and  now that I have determined that there is a process that will hopefully help me in eliminating my doubts, I have begun to feel more satisfied and at peace with my beliefs, and feel confident that leaving Syria will be a positive decision.