Faith and the belief systems play a vital role in driving the human experience. In their articles, Street (2010), Keane (2008), and Lewis (2002) make interesting discussions about the concept of belief in the universal world. This essay utilizes their influence to argue that belief is not in opposition to doubt. Also, however, there appears to be a clear universal distinction between irrational and rational beliefs. The following is a further discussion on this issue.
Belief systems, however, have different ways of explaining forces that operate within the contemporary world. Christianity, for instance, as suggested by Alice Street (2010) believe in God as the creator of the universe and Giver of the innovativeness and health in the highly globalized world. Street’s ethnographic exploration of Christianity among Papua New Guineans (PNGs) result in the development of the relational action theory. This theory implies that unlike traditional PNG belief systems, Christianity transformed patient’s engagement with western medicine. That is, they enter the healthcare system as a place of stasis in which they lack the ability to establish effective relationships with doctors and family. Therefore, patients are hopeful that their relationship with God would lead them into becoming proper agents. Such intersections build up the idea that globalization can change society’s explanations to belief (Street 2010).
That said, it would be vital to note that there exists a universal distinction between rational and irrational beliefs. On one hand, irrationality in the belief system involves submission to irrational authorities. The system supports followers with unrealistic needs about the self, others, and the world in general. For instance, Lewis (2002) conducted a participant ethnographic analysis on the Sepik in the Gnau village in New Guinea. In this study, irrationality presents itself when the actors unsuccessfully perform a series of rites in the worship of Malyi to heal Dauwaras. They rely on hope to the gods Dauwaras would return to full health at the end of the rituals. One would recognize it as sharing relations with dysfunctional behavior and feelings. That is, followers of this system would accept ideas as true just because the majority follows suit.
Contrarily, rational beliefs borrow much from the individual and societal convictions. The system follows a trait that engages one’s entire personality as opposed to a given belief. In any case, rational beliefs follow personal experiences, judgments, and observations. In his field work on the Sumba in Eastern Indonesia, Keane (2008) describes a universally accepted distinction between rationality and irrationality in what he terms as universal truth claims. Keane (2008: 112) quotes, “Your God is good for you, and our gods are good for us.” As a rational believer, Keane should depict someone that trusts their core being. That is the person and believes he possesses as a participant to this community should not change with dynamic situations. Otherwise, a loss of faith in the self would imply that Keane becomes dependent of the Sumba in search of their approval.
However, belief and doubt are not representative of two sides of the same coin. Ideally, parties from both arguments can find the same footing depending on their way of thought. For instance, on one hand, they can become argumentatively rational through critical analysis, research, and observation. Keane (2008) suggests that in as much as evidence is never necessary, societies will always treat religious practices as evidence for their belief. Contrarily, they could also perceive each other as irrational in the wake of baseless arguments. The idea here is that there exist not such huge differences between beliefs and doubt. They are more of different people on the same side of the coin as long as they either accept or reject each other’s views.
In conclusion, this essay argues for the role and place of belief systems in the contemporary world. For instance, the essay finds that unlike its irrational counterpart, rational belief is a huge component of rationalism. That is, rationalism implies possessing a vision upon study, observation, and reflective thinking. Indeed, there still exists a gray area in exploring the difference in rationality between belief and doubt.
Bibliography
Keane, W. 2008. The Evidence of the Senses and the Materiality of Religion. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 14, 110-127.
Lewis, G. 2002. Between public assertion and private doubts. A Sepik ritual of healing and reflexivity. Social Anthropology, 10, 1, 11-21.
Street, A. 2010. Belief as relational action: Christianity and cultural change in Papua New Guinea. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 16, 260-278.
