what is the religion of reason?

[Belinda]

About ten days ago I was persuaded of a view xyz by a man who is more astute and knowledgeable than I am.
Traditionally it's easier for a woman to be persuaded by a respectable man, more so than vice versa, as men are traditionally supposed to be the persuaders and even today suffer ego damage if they are confronted by women cleverer than they.

The persuasion xyz has so far endured for a little more than a week, and in our experience will need refreshing otherwise I tend to forget the argument.

You were persuaded. He presented arguments and evidence and these changed your mind. You didn't decide to change your belief. You were affected by what you experienced.

To decide to change a belief would be something like.
I don't believe X.
I want to believe X.
and either
Now, because I decided, I believe X.
Or you find some process to convince yourself.

But that would be a bit odd.

But I am a very active listener when it suits me, and this man is worth attending to.

I suppose there is a sort of listening which does not involve hearing in the sense of "I hear you", which people sometimes say to show they have empathy.
I nearly always want to believe this person but only after I have subjected him to as close questioning as I am capable of; however as he is quick on the uptake this phase of our discussions is as brief as may be and flavoured with laughter.

[Iwannaplato]

But I am a very active listener when it suits me, and this man is worth attending to.

I suppose there is a sort of listening which does not involve hearing in the sense of "I hear you", which people sometimes say to show they have empathy.
I nearly always want to believe this person but only after I have subjected him to as close questioning as I am capable of; however as he is quick on the uptake this phase of our discussions is as brief as may be and flavoured with laughter.

I am not saying you are a mere passive receiver. What I am saying is more like
you didn't see this guy and think 'he's persuasive and I want to believe X, so I'll go and get him to talk to me and listen very carefully and he will convince me to believe X.'
You had an experience that led to a belief. You didn't choose the belief.

And I think if one mulls this idea, it'll be clear this would be an odd enterprise. Hey, I will choose to believe X.
Beliefs form via experience, they form as side effects of actitivies we engage in for other reasons.

[Belinda]

But I am a very active listener when it suits me, and this man is worth attending to.

I suppose there is a sort of listening which does not involve hearing in the sense of "I hear you", which people sometimes say to show they have empathy.
I nearly always want to believe this person but only after I have subjected him to as close questioning as I am capable of; however as he is quick on the uptake this phase of our discussions is as brief as may be and flavoured with laughter.

I am not saying you are a mere passive receiver. What I am saying is more like
you didn't see this guy and think 'he's persuasive and I want to believe X, so I'll go and get him to talk to me and listen very carefully and he will convince me to believe X.'
You had an experience that led to a belief. You didn't choose the belief.

And I think if one mulls this idea, it'll be clear this would be an odd enterprise. Hey, I will choose to believe X.
Beliefs form via experience, they form as side effects of actitivies we engage in for other reasons.

For historical reasons I value compassion, honesty, and high principles and I know my persuader. Consequently I have reason to want to be persuaded by x.

I agree my experience led to my belief. We are at cross purposes due to conflicting notions as to what 'choose' means. What I mean by 'choose' is what all animals do when confronted by change. Some animals choose according to instinct and lack conscience while other animals can feel guilty or even remorseful. I have a dog who feels remorseful when he bites me. He however harbours no persuasions and his feelings seem to proceed from snap to belly-up remorse without pausing for reflection.

A lot of people use 'choose' to mean active response that includes conscious reflection.

[Iwannaplato]

A lot of people use 'choose' to mean active response that includes conscious reflection.

Yes, but then what is one choosing (in the sense of the word you are using)?
Are you choosing to reflect over things and to be open to new ideas?
Or are you choosing to believe X?
I really doubt it is the latter.

You have chosen (in your sense of the word) to consider things, even perhaps ideas that make you uncomfortable, whereas others may push away at anything that makes them feel uncomfortable (cognitive dissonance, for example).

But you did not choose to believe X.

Because you make the choice to be open and reflect and consider, perhaps you are more likely to change your mind, especially when persuaded by someone you respect.

But you are not choosing to engage with that guy so he will change your might because you made a choice to be persuaded to believe X.

Now you could say that after reflection you choose to believe he is correct. But I don't think that works. You reflect and what you reflect on convinces you - plus whatever there is in your background, your tendencies, other beliefs, even emotional factors (like wanting to believe this guy, or being relieved by belief X and so on) also push for whatever conclusion you end up with.

[Belinda]

A lot of people use 'choose' to mean active response that includes conscious reflection.

Yes, but then what is one choosing (in the sense of the word you are using)?
Are you choosing to reflect over things and to be open to new ideas?
Or are you choosing to believe X?
I really doubt it is the latter.

You have chosen (in your sense of the word) to consider things, even perhaps ideas that make you uncomfortable, whereas others may push away at anything that makes them feel uncomfortable (cognitive dissonance, for example).

But you did not choose to believe X.

Because you make the choice to be open and reflect and consider, perhaps you are more likely to change your mind, especially when persuaded by someone you respect.

But you are not choosing to engage with that guy so he will change your might because you made a choice to be persuaded to believe X.

Now you could say that after reflection you choose to believe he is correct. But I don't think that works. You reflect and what you reflect on convinces you - plus whatever there is in your background, your tendencies, other beliefs, even emotional factors (like wanting to believe this guy, or being relieved by belief X and so on) also push for whatever conclusion you end up with.

It's matter of personal trust in x's honesty and well meaning.If x was a stranger or someone I knew not to be trustworthy then I'd not so readily accept his claims and arguments , and I'd be guarded as to my own motives. So I agree with you. My belief in x's character is part of my confirmation bias of which the other component is x does as a matter of fact carry my pre-existing bias to a more comprehensive and reasonable conclusion.

I have claimed and still maintain that a religion of reason is , for me and millions like me, based on Axial Age morality plus European Enlightenment reasoning.I never claimed a religion of reason could be de novo.