"Exception: If careful evaluation of the hypothetical outcomes of continued investment versus accepting current losses and ceasing all further investment have been made, then choosing the former would not be fallacious."
"Exception: If careful evaluation of the hypothetical outcomes of continued investment versus accepting current losses and ceasing all further investment have been made, then choosing the former would not be fallacious."
Because the decision would be founded on a rational analysis, rather than the sunk cost fallacy.
At the risk of being "that guy," I personally would apply this fallacy to my experience with religion in general. So much time in my life was spent trying to figure out what the correct interpretation of the Bible is. Did the JW's have it? Did The Way have it? Which offshoot had it? Was it mainstream Christianity after all? Maybe some combination of various approaches?
I spent so much time invested in the premise that The Bible Is Truth, it never occurred to me to question it. To do so would be to open myself up to the probability that all the time I invested in Who Got It Right was wasted.
How would you approach someone who devoted his life to understanding the Quran or Dianetics?
It's not easy to cut your losses, but it sure beats the alternative.
Well, here's the thing. The Way theological system strongly discouraged rational analysis. That's basically what's at the heart of the undershepharding concept. If someone spots a flaw in the system, the idea is to convince them they should continue, even though to do so would clearly be like "throwing good money after bad". As we know, there was even a class (W&US), designed to teach the methods needed to lead people into accepting this fallacy. It didn't just happen randomly, all by itself.
BUt I would argue that TWI was a bit more clever than what you're describing. I think they did a fantastic job of teaching critical thinking skills, as long as those skills were directed elsewhere. Spotting the flaws in other people's positions and arguments was something they did exceptionally well. They (we) just couldn't apply the same discerning eye to themselves (ourselves) in terms of what TWI taught.
I felt exactly that way ... Sunk Too Much Into It ... when I got to Gunnison my final year in-residence. TJ actually threw all of us out of the Corps one day after lunch for acting like "short-timers". Only one of us, a woman named Denise, had the good sense to leave. All the rest of us knew our time was short and we just tried to play the game until graduation. We should have all left that day. I know my life would have been much less stressful for nearly a decade afterward if I had.
...BUt I would argue that TWI was a bit more clever than what you're describing. I think they did a fantastic job of teaching critical thinking skills, as long as those skills were directed elsewhere. Spotting the flaws in other people's positions and arguments was something they did exceptionally well. They (we) just couldn't apply the same discerning eye to themselves (ourselves) in terms of what TWI taught.
That was what I saw (in hindsight of course)
TWI did teach us to question, to analyze, to think, but only outward, never at what TWI was teaching
TWI did teach us to question, to analyze, to think, but only outward, never at what TWI was teaching
And that could be why many of us just don't go to ANY church or fellowship/ministry and some have even renounced Christianity.
I know that I went to a non-denominational church for a couple of years in the 1990s. I had to consciously overlook anything having to do with the trinity...
Eventually, even that church, which has some wonderful people, grew tedious for me.
The opposite, I think. It's why some of us still insist on going to some church of some kind, even one that's not based on the "rightly divided word," because the alternative, abandoning church and its doctrines altogether, would be a tacit admission that all the time spent parsing the choice of prepositions in order to unlock the nature of the Creator of the Universe might maybe have been wasted.
How could I have been wasting my time when I was taught how to think? (Answer: you were simultaneously taught that questioning God was bad, the first step to the fall of man. And the moment you accept the premise that God as a concept cannot be questioned, you become potential prey to anyone you believe speaks for that God).
The Bible ( if it is to be believed of course ) contains a number of people throughout the ages who came to crossroads in their lives and chose whether to take the left or right, high or low road, from Moses to Jesus to Paul....I don't think it's something unique to any particular person or organization. By your statements you infer they were misguided idiots...in their minds you were probably thought of as the same The republicans think that of the democrats and vice versa, just the nature of man.
Of course the million dollar question could be...are you 'saved' ....maybe there should be a 'renouncing prayer' that goes along the lines of.."Heavenly Father, I just don't believe anymore so on the off chance I got 'saved' at a particular moment in time I would like to officially renounce any salvation that may have occurred and allow me to take my place again in the mass of the unwashed human civilization..in Jesus ( who was just another unqualified supposed holy man )name, amen I wonder really if a lot of 'renouncers' somewhere deep down in their pscyche still take comfort from the fact that..."hey, even if I'm wrong on this God/bible denying thing..at least I know I'm saved " ??
Allan, that's an interesting point you raise. My problem is, TWI taught that I couldn't renounce my salvation if I wanted to. I'll see you up there, period, no matter what I believe now.
The Bible ( if it is to be believed of course ) contains a number of people throughout the ages who came to crossroads in their lives and chose whether to take the left or right, high or low road, from Moses to Jesus to Paul....I don't think it's something unique to any particular person or organization. By your statements you infer they were misguided idiots...in their minds you were probably thought of as the same :rolleyes:/> The republicans think that of the democrats and vice versa, just the nature of man.
The emphasis in bold is mine. Allan, I don't see where anyone is saying anything of the kind about Jesus, Moses or Paul. I have not implied that they were misguided idiots anywhere, and certainly not on this thread.
Quick grammar lesson, by the way: INFERRING is done by the hearers and readers of information, not by the speakers and writers. You meant to say "By your statements you IMPLY they were misguided idiots." Which I dispute. I neither said nor intended any such thing.
The opposite, I think. It's why some of us still insist on going to some church of some kind, even one that's not based on the "rightly divided word," because the alternative, abandoning church and its doctrines altogether, would be a tacit admission that all the time spent parsing the choice of prepositions in order to unlock the nature of the Creator of the Universe might maybe have been wasted.
How could I have been wasting my time when I was taught how to think? (Answer: you were simultaneously taught that questioning God was bad, the first step to the fall of man. And the moment you accept the premise that God as a concept cannot be questioned, you become potential prey to anyone you believe speaks for that God).
Then again, maybe some of us enjoyed a relationship with God prior and maybe even during the years in TWI and wanted to continue that relationship. Also, maybe some of us realized that some of the doctrine that we were taught was critical wasn't really that important in the grand scheme of things. Also there may have been a realization that even some, well, maybe even most, of the stuff taught by TWI was wrong, or at least at cross purposes of what the Bible really teaches. Some people have a genuine belief in God and they employ sound reasoning. I became very disillusioned when I saw these men whom I considered great holy men of God act like a bunch of spoiled toddlers when POP was read. I began to question the validity of anything I learned in TWI. I didn't have the guts to leave at that point, but I was shocked at leaders' behaviors.
I never took the WUS class.
BUt I would argue that TWI was a bit more clever than what you're describing. I think they did a fantastic job of teaching critical thinking skills, as long as those skills were directed elsewhere. Spotting the flaws in other people's positions and arguments was something they did exceptionally well. They (we) just couldn't apply the same discerning eye to themselves (ourselves) in terms of what TWI taught.
I don't think they taught any reasoning skills at all. They just yelled at or made fun of people who didn't tow the line. I was scared to death pretty much the whole time. Why did I stay for 15 years? I dunno. Anyway, that's just the way I feel about it for whatever that's worth.
Then again, maybe some of us enjoyed a relationship with God prior and maybe even during the years in TWI and wanted to continue that relationship. Also, maybe some of us realized that some of the doctrine that we were taught was critical wasn't really that important in the grand scheme of things. Also there may have been a realization that even some, well, maybe even most, of the stuff taught by TWI was wrong, or at least at cross purposes of what the Bible really teaches. Some people have a genuine belief in God and they employ sound reasoning. I became very disillusioned when I saw these men whom I considered great holy men of God act like a bunch of spoiled toddlers when POP was read. I began to question the validity of anything I learned in TWI. I didn't have the guts to leave at that point, but I was shocked at leaders' behaviors.
I don't think they taught any reasoning skills at all. They just yelled at or made fun of people who didn't tow the line. I was scared to death pretty much the whole time. Why did I stay for 15 years? I dunno. Anyway, that's just the way I feel about it for whatever that's worth.
For the first paragraph, nothing I wrote was intended to be a blanket statement. I apologize if I was less than clear about that.
For the second paragraph, again, I don't think there was one TWI experience. I give them more credit than you do. I don't think that makes either of us incorrect.
For the first paragraph, nothing I wrote was intended to be a blanket statement. I apologize if I was less than clear about that.
For the second paragraph, again, I don't think there was one TWI experience. I give them more credit than you do. I don't think that makes either of us incorrect.
No apology necessary. I was just submitting another point of view.
RE: The original purpose of this thread, when I was doing business consulting, we called it "pounding money down a rat hole".
RE: other stuff on this thread, every single one of us had different experiences before, during and after our involvement with TWI, which is why I respect your position, Raf, even though I don't necessarily agree with every part of it. I just found out day before yesterday about the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, four sources to consider when looking for truth, 1.) Scripture 2.) Tradition 3.) Reason and 4.) Experience. That explained so much to me about the Wesleyan Holiness movement of the late-1800s that the Pentecostal/Charismatic movements of the 20th century came out of. I just spent my holiday break writing a 10,000 word paper on the topic.
My experience of TWI was more similar to Broken Arrow's.
Love,
Steve
Raf, my writing style is more journalistic than academic, and I wasn't confined to the requirements of a syllabus in writing my project over the break. I'm not turning it in for a class, but I'm going to let some of my profs read it. I think they will appreciate not having to grade it!
Recommended Posts
waysider
"Exception: If careful evaluation of the hypothetical outcomes of continued investment versus accepting current losses and ceasing all further investment have been made, then choosing the former would not be fallacious."
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Because the decision would be founded on a rational analysis, rather than the sunk cost fallacy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
At the risk of being "that guy," I personally would apply this fallacy to my experience with religion in general. So much time in my life was spent trying to figure out what the correct interpretation of the Bible is. Did the JW's have it? Did The Way have it? Which offshoot had it? Was it mainstream Christianity after all? Maybe some combination of various approaches?
I spent so much time invested in the premise that The Bible Is Truth, it never occurred to me to question it. To do so would be to open myself up to the probability that all the time I invested in Who Got It Right was wasted.
How would you approach someone who devoted his life to understanding the Quran or Dianetics?
It's not easy to cut your losses, but it sure beats the alternative.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well, here's the thing. The Way theological system strongly discouraged rational analysis. That's basically what's at the heart of the undershepharding concept. If someone spots a flaw in the system, the idea is to convince them they should continue, even though to do so would clearly be like "throwing good money after bad". As we know, there was even a class (W&US), designed to teach the methods needed to lead people into accepting this fallacy. It didn't just happen randomly, all by itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I never took the WUS class.
BUt I would argue that TWI was a bit more clever than what you're describing. I think they did a fantastic job of teaching critical thinking skills, as long as those skills were directed elsewhere. Spotting the flaws in other people's positions and arguments was something they did exceptionally well. They (we) just couldn't apply the same discerning eye to themselves (ourselves) in terms of what TWI taught.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogLover
I felt exactly that way ... Sunk Too Much Into It ... when I got to Gunnison my final year in-residence. TJ actually threw all of us out of the Corps one day after lunch for acting like "short-timers". Only one of us, a woman named Denise, had the good sense to leave. All the rest of us knew our time was short and we just tried to play the game until graduation. We should have all left that day. I know my life would have been much less stressful for nearly a decade afterward if I had.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
TWI did teach us to question, to analyze, to think, but only outward, never at what TWI was teaching
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
And that could be why many of us just don't go to ANY church or fellowship/ministry and some have even renounced Christianity.
I know that I went to a non-denominational church for a couple of years in the 1990s. I had to consciously overlook anything having to do with the trinity...
Eventually, even that church, which has some wonderful people, grew tedious for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
The opposite, I think. It's why some of us still insist on going to some church of some kind, even one that's not based on the "rightly divided word," because the alternative, abandoning church and its doctrines altogether, would be a tacit admission that all the time spent parsing the choice of prepositions in order to unlock the nature of the Creator of the Universe might maybe have been wasted.
How could I have been wasting my time when I was taught how to think? (Answer: you were simultaneously taught that questioning God was bad, the first step to the fall of man. And the moment you accept the premise that God as a concept cannot be questioned, you become potential prey to anyone you believe speaks for that God).
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
The Bible ( if it is to be believed of course ) contains a number of people throughout the ages who came to crossroads in their lives and chose whether to take the left or right, high or low road, from Moses to Jesus to Paul....I don't think it's something unique to any particular person or organization. By your statements you infer they were misguided idiots...in their minds you were probably thought of as the same
The republicans think that of the democrats and vice versa, just the nature of man.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Of course the million dollar question could be...are you 'saved' ....maybe there should be a 'renouncing prayer' that goes along the lines of.."Heavenly Father, I just don't believe anymore so on the off chance I got 'saved' at a particular moment in time I would like to officially renounce any salvation that may have occurred and allow me to take my place again in the mass of the unwashed human civilization..in Jesus ( who was just another unqualified supposed holy man )name, amen
I wonder really if a lot of 'renouncers' somewhere deep down in their pscyche still take comfort from the fact that..."hey, even if I'm wrong on this God/bible denying thing..at least I know I'm saved " ??
...just wondering
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Allan, that's an interesting point you raise. My problem is, TWI taught that I couldn't renounce my salvation if I wanted to. I'll see you up there, period, no matter what I believe now.
I believe a full answer to your question would be off-topic. I am posting my response here, to avoid derailing THIS thread.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
The emphasis in bold is mine. Allan, I don't see where anyone is saying anything of the kind about Jesus, Moses or Paul. I have not implied that they were misguided idiots anywhere, and certainly not on this thread.
Quick grammar lesson, by the way: INFERRING is done by the hearers and readers of information, not by the speakers and writers. You meant to say "By your statements you IMPLY they were misguided idiots." Which I dispute. I neither said nor intended any such thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Then again, maybe some of us enjoyed a relationship with God prior and maybe even during the years in TWI and wanted to continue that relationship. Also, maybe some of us realized that some of the doctrine that we were taught was critical wasn't really that important in the grand scheme of things. Also there may have been a realization that even some, well, maybe even most, of the stuff taught by TWI was wrong, or at least at cross purposes of what the Bible really teaches. Some people have a genuine belief in God and they employ sound reasoning. I became very disillusioned when I saw these men whom I considered great holy men of God act like a bunch of spoiled toddlers when POP was read. I began to question the validity of anything I learned in TWI. I didn't have the guts to leave at that point, but I was shocked at leaders' behaviors.
I don't think they taught any reasoning skills at all. They just yelled at or made fun of people who didn't tow the line. I was scared to death pretty much the whole time. Why did I stay for 15 years? I dunno. Anyway, that's just the way I feel about it for whatever that's worth.
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
For the first paragraph, nothing I wrote was intended to be a blanket statement. I apologize if I was less than clear about that.
For the second paragraph, again, I don't think there was one TWI experience. I give them more credit than you do. I don't think that makes either of us incorrect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
No apology necessary. I was just submitting another point of view.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
RE: The original purpose of this thread, when I was doing business consulting, we called it "pounding money down a rat hole".
RE: other stuff on this thread, every single one of us had different experiences before, during and after our involvement with TWI, which is why I respect your position, Raf, even though I don't necessarily agree with every part of it. I just found out day before yesterday about the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, four sources to consider when looking for truth, 1.) Scripture 2.) Tradition 3.) Reason and 4.) Experience. That explained so much to me about the Wesleyan Holiness movement of the late-1800s that the Pentecostal/Charismatic movements of the 20th century came out of. I just spent my holiday break writing a 10,000 word paper on the topic.
My experience of TWI was more similar to Broken Arrow's.
Love,
Steve
Raf, my writing style is more journalistic than academic, and I wasn't confined to the requirements of a syllabus in writing my project over the break. I'm not turning it in for a class, but I'm going to let some of my profs read it. I think they will appreciate not having to grade it!
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.