TED Conversations

Gordon Taylor

Retired engineer

This conversation is closed.

Are people of faith in fact gullible?

Gullibility is the belief in something with no substantiating facts to support that something. I contend that if you believe in something based upon Scripture, whichever religion you belong to then you are gullible. That is not to mean evil or stupid but simply gullible. This also differs somewhat from credulous depending on what actions you take in support of your beliefs or faith.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 18 2013: Gullibility I think works both ways especially where narrow, singular beliefs are concerned.

    If one had a balanced and empathic view of the various ways in which people make sense of the world, the less gullible one would become, in my view.

    A person of faith might actually see you as gullible, if your views are too narrowly atheistic and non-empathic towards 84% of the world's population:


    I am not a man of faith myself, but in realising that religions are not going to go away anytime soon, I try my best to understand why people do have faith. I'm guessing that faith is just as much a psychological imperative to those many people as much as substantiating facts are for you.

    What are your thoughts?
    • thumb
      Apr 18 2013: I don't want to suggest that 84% of the world is gullible but only that those people of faith that are not sceptical either lack the inclination or the resources to examine there beliefs critically. I must admit that the conversation started here has more or less confirmed that view, which speaks well for this forum. I don't proffess to be an atheist and I don't think that refusing to accept the dogma of an organized religion is a castigation of any religion but rather a statement of my own independant analysis. Take the time to read the various comments on this question and ask yourself if they don't reflect a variety of mindsets resulting from analyses of various depths. These differing viewpoints only, in my opinion, serve to point out the lack of a consensus on the veracity of religous dogma or beliefs. Again that is not to say any one of them is right but only that there remains a substantial basis for disagreement.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.