False beliefs, non-ideals, and dogmatic doctrines

The Existential – Philosophic Psychical Harmonization

We’ve discussed a few examples of wrong judgments specific to the concrete mental; in the next pages we’ll present a few examples of wrong judgments specific to the existential – philosophic mental; these judgments are characterized by different false expectations under the form of some doctrines or the non-ideals.

Example 1 – When she was alone or in the discussions with her friends, Adriana said many times that she thinks and she’s absolutely convinced that Osiris resurrected and that now he’s the king of the Kingdom of the souls “from the other side” and that he is the only real God and that who will judge her soul when she’ll die.

1. In those moments (when she uttered the statements mentioned above in front of herself and of the others) she felt a state of slightly anxiety, un-decision and doubt regarding her statements; but most of the time she doesn’t admit this state, considering the doubt a sign of the belief’s weakness or a temptation from the demon Seth.

2. The circumstances in which that psychical suffering specific to the indecision and obsession were those previously described.

3. In those moments, in her psyche there were judgments like:

- “I know that Osiris resurrected. I am convinced of this thing – I’ve read the Holly Book (The Egyptian Book of the Dead) and besides, this thing is strongly sustained by the Osiris priests, too.”

- “I know that He is the only real God.”

4. Behind these judgments, implied by them, there are some false expectations like:

- “All that I think about the different aspects of the reality (which I haven’t checked yet or I can’t check them) should be true (to be always as I think they should be).”

- “All that is written in a book, about the different aspects of the reality I haven’t checked yet (or I can’t check), should always be true.”

- “All that the other people say should always be true.”

The false expectations are obvious: the others testimonies (received from the books or orally) are not always true.

To expect the contrary is a false expectation, which is pointed out by the signal of psychical suffering specific to the indecision or obsession.



All the “believers” (those who are absolutely convinced about the reality of a phenomenon, but which wasn’t previously checked, taking into the consideration only the others testimony) “suffer” of indecision, hesitation, doubt (of “moments of raising and falling) because they sustain in themselves some wrong judgments.

The truth is that they know that they can’t be absolutely convinced of their “belief” (as long as they haven’t checked it yet and / or can’t check it) and that they have moments of hesitation and doubt regarding “the belief” they are sustaining; but, when they have them, they don’t confess them openly.

Why? For many reasons:

- They may consider that the other ones really think this thing and don’t have like them moments of hesitation; and then “being ashamed” that “they can’t reach at the level of the other ones” they don’t confess their doubts; or if they do it, it’s only to sustain that they had doubts, but they immediately passed away.

But they don’t know the truth that the doubts, indecisions, un-determinations haven’t pass them away ; they will find out the truth that they will never pass away from them as long as they sustain in their psyche some information seen as certain, although they haven’t checked them yet (or they can’t check).

The psychical suffering specific to these doubts, un-determinations, indecisions, inner agitations, point them out that they have in them some wrong judgments (specific to some doctrines and non-ideals, to the “blind belief”); in this way they jeopardize the capacity of the optimum adaptation to the surrounding realities from the present and / or from the future (the uncertain information they have, but about which they think that they’re certain, will give fast birth at some false predictions regarding the evolution of the phenomena with which the own system get in touch; in this way its capacity of adaptation to the change decreases, jeopardizing even its harmony and existence).

- From instinct of herd (and sometimes of self-preserving) or from the desire to belong to a certain group, they copy totally and indiscriminately the values and the “beliefs” of that group, without questioning about them in front of the other ones, because they would risk to be eliminated from the “herd” and thus to lose the advantages offered by the affiliation to that group (a high level of safety, of support in need, of satisfaction the need of communication etc.).



So the majority of the religious beliefs or those of other kind got by the most of the people are the result of the automatic copying of some values, statements and information which exist in the herd they belong to or / and in which they grew up; from the reasons shown above, they are not contested in front of the other ones, even if in privacy they do this, they doubt of them.

Another reason for keeping in themselves some different unchecked beliefs is the half-justified association of the “fact of confession”, of the state of belief, with the getting of a state of good.

For example: “Since I believe in Osiris (Christ, Budha, Allah, Shiva, Krishna, Iahve etc.) I don’t get angry so often as before, I am more calm (because He says that I have to be so) and thus I feel much better.”

Obviously, this association made by the “believer” is not totally justified; the real cause for his state of good (the different signals of psychical suffering don’t appear in his psyche as often as before or at the intensity they had before) is that he’s not angry anymore, that he’s more humble etc. (he doesn’t keep in himself some wrong judgments specific to the concrete mental) no matter in who he believes (in Apollo or Tao, in Santa Claus etc.).

So these beliefs start from the false expectations specific to the non-ideals or to some doctrines, to the “blind belief” (which was previously discussed) like:

- “All that I think about the world at a given moment should be true, even if I haven’t checked yet what I believe.”

- “All that the other people say to me about the different aspects of the existence should always be true, even if I haven’t checked them yet (or I can’t check them).”

- “Nobody should ever lie to me (no matter if he wants or not to do that)” etc.