The Placebo Effect in Science from a Moral Point of View

The struggle for a new presence of the mind of faith, it seems to me, is an urgent mission of the Church in our century (Benedict XVI, Pope of Rome)

It would be necessary to begin a conversation about the relationship between reason and faith in science with how the phenomenon of reason was understood by outstanding authorities, at least with how Kant understood it. However, his understanding is difficult to comprehend due to semantic difficulties, because he could give a different meaning to words than the one we can now. When he initially writes about the eternal and unchangeable laws of reason without defining them, they seem self-evident to him, but mysterious to me. Therefore, I cannot understand this phenomenon of “pure mind”, but I agree that someone understands it, although I suspect that this understanding may differ from person to person.

According to Kant, knowledge begins from experience, and experience confirms knowledge. However, knowledge can be innate, which may not be confirmed by experience, therefore one should proceed from the fact that the basis of a person’s cognitive activity is faith since he trusts his feelings and experience, his conclusions, as well as the words of authorities, which at different ages of a person and stages of his development there may be parents, teachers, clergy, scientists and pseudo-scientists, psychics, and charlatans. When using the concept of “faith,” one should consider the individual characteristics of a person. Erich Fromm saw the two main ways of his existence possession and being. To separate both methods is difficult, because there cannot be possession without being, and for the most part they are present to varying degrees in each person. Fromm spoke only about the advantage of one of the methods, which determines the differences in the individual characters of people. Accordingly, the understanding of the «faith concept» can differ in a religious, political, or personal sense, depending on what principle – possession or being – it is used.

On the other hand, in the absence of trust in the source of information or due to a contradiction with existing knowledge, a person may doubt or not perceive what is new or unusual for him. He usually looks for objections to something unusual or new. However, one can also look for confirmation and explanation, only a common person doesn’t do this because he doesn’t believe it if the source of information is unreliable or he doesn’t like it for some reason. People can trust their fantasies, fictitious explanations of reality, only because they please them and, less often, based on extrasensory feelings, imagination, and sometimes tacit knowledge, including esoteric ones. Clear and expressive ideas are more credible and do not need to be probed into whether they are true or false. A certain level of thinking is necessary to understand the criterion of truth, in the search for which a person should be critical of any ideas that have not been tested in practice or have not been proven scientifically. That such a level is not easy to achieve is shown by the example of Descartes, who, despite his skepticism towards anything, argued that it is a clear and intelligible idea that is the criterion of truth. Having delved into this problem, Vico and Hume realized that when a person believes in a certain idea, this does not mean that he trusts its truth. That is, a clear and intelligible idea is only a psychological criterion. The idea of the Sun revolving around the Earth is clear and expressive, but erroneous.

Another feature of faith that significantly influences mass consciousness, is when a person accepts even meaningless ideas as a tendency exists to name the one with whom we differ in views as being stupid. Andersen reflected on this phenomenon in his fairy tale «The Emperor’s New Clothes». Little has changed in this regard in the world, this human characteristic is successfully used by politicians to promote false and even deliberately falsified ideas

Thus, knowledge based solely on faith may correspond to reality in whole or partly, or not at all. They may also be perceived and spread further, or they may not be taken for granted and remain the property of a narrow circle of people. It follows from this that our knowledge is generally hypothetical and to finally recognize its truth, it must be confirmed in practice, experimentally, or proven using mathematics, the laws of logic, physics, chemistry, etc. Of course, it goes without saying that if people do not trust each other, but rely only on the knowledge acquired on their own, they will die. In the process of exchanging information, people inevitably come to recognize certain people as reliable sources of information and tend to believe such a person at least in most cases, even if the information is erroneous. If such an authority cannot explain certain things, he may resort to fabrications that are believed. However, some people may have doubts, especially when a person’s authority is unreliable, that is, he was mistaken in some of his previous judgments.

Pope John Paul II’s encyclical «Fides et ratio» is dedicated to the relationship between faith and reason. The Pope, when he says: Faith alone makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently [JOHN PAUL II. 1998] means faith in God. However, the faith content can be extended and used widely. Another thing is that, when gaining knowledge with the help of reason, we must proceed from the fact that God is the root cause of all things and phenomena.

We often see that some skeptics do not even believe in empirical and rational knowledge, which only emphasizes the role of faith in the process of knowing reality. This phenomenon can also be observed in science. Often a scientist will believe in some of his ideas, then look for explanations and arguments and build a new theory. At the same time, other scientists do not believe in it and therefore look for objections, and it rarely happens that someone else is looking for confirmation of a new theory. As a result, a new theory or idea is finally accepted when its opponents have either already died, or is reliably confirmed by experiment, and often by material gain. All this suggests the futility of convincing people without visual confirmation of any opinion. This has always been the case because Plato said: “Whoever does not convince himself will not be convinced by anyone.” The presumption “until you believe, you will not understand” can be found already in the Old Testament. Consequently, it can be argued that self-knowledge, a person’s knowledge of himself, largely determines the ability to understand the world. Self-knowledge of a person is based on comparison with others, and knowledge of a person in his development is possible only by studying his history compared with people of the past. This implies the meaning of written history, but written as the closest to real events and interpreted most objectively. Collingwood believed that questions about the subject, method, and value of history should only be answered by specialists. But, according to Collingwood, not even every historian can answer the questions posed, because he must have a certain experience in a special form of thought and reason about this experience. He noted:

… experience of anything whatever gained through the ordinary educational channels, as well as being superficial is invariable of date. Experience of historical thinking, so gained, is modelled on text-books, and text-books always describe not what is now being thought be real live historians, but what was thought by real live historians at some time in the past when raw material was being created out of which the text-book had been put together [COLLINGWOOD R.G. 1946: 7-8].

This phenomenon is common, in particular, in historical linguistics, the foundations of which were formed not only on raw but also on meager material collected by linguists during the fairly short time of the existence of this science. And Collingwood draws attention to one more point:

… there is a peculiar illusion incidental to all knowledge acquired in the way of education: the illusion of finality. When a student is in statu puppilari with respect to any subject whatever, he has to believe that things are settled because the text-books and his teachers regard them as settled. When he emerges from that state and goes on studying the subject for himself he finds that nothing is settled. The dogmatism which is an invariable mark of immaturity drops away from him. He looks at so-called facts with a new eye… On the other hand if he emerges from the status of pupil without continuing to pursue the subject he never rids himself of this dogmatic attitude [Ibid: 8].

Continuing the discussion on this topic, it should be noted that, contrary to Collingwood’s opinion, there must be once and for all certain basic facts that are the foundation of any research. Meanwhile, sometimes such basic facts turn out to be false and then the entire superstructure instantly falls apart as soon as a true fact is found. For example, in history, one should know who was the bearer of a particular archaeological culture. Without such knowledge, further conclusions will not correspond to reality. Something similar can be seen when women are uncertain about pregnancy. When pregnancy does not have reliable evidence and is denied, it is possible to outline the future destiny of the woman, which will be completely different from the actual one when it turns out that she is pregnant.

Now let’s develop the topic of faith and knowledge somewhat more broadly. In general, the value of faith in the process of cognition is influenced by the total amount of knowledge. For example, the amount of modern knowledge about cosmology greatly reduces faith in the dogma of eschatology. Other examples can be found.

Initially, a reliable guide for humans, if we talk about him from his very appearance on Earth, were instincts that guided his behavior just as they guide the behavior of animals. The spiritual development of a person in the process of the struggle for existence and preservation of offspring begins in him with the development of the internal need for knowledge, which initially manifested itself in the search for stereotypes of adequate behavior in various conditions, new means of maintaining life and health – food, methods of preservation heat, treating wounds and diseases, etc. Before Francis Bacon, people understood the truth “knowledge is power.” Even sexual desire includes the desire for mutual knowledge between a man and a woman. The process of cognition begins with the contemplation of the surrounding world and its perception through sensations, which initiate the thinking process in a person. Without delving into the intricacies of epistemology, which generally comes down to two theories – empiricism and rationalism, we agree that cognition is a complex process in which the senses and human mind take part. As a result of knowledge, the first forms of human society appeared, with the development of which the human spiritual development must be linked. Even before humans began to use language for transmitting information in society, he began to learn by deliberately following the behavior of his loved ones, be it his parents or the most successful hunters, etc. At the same time, any novelty causes gradual changes in society, which follow one after another without a visible break:

Hence arises the illusion which leads philosophers of history into affirming that there is a real and fundamental continuity in historic metamorphoses. The true causes can be reduced to a chain of ideas which are, to be sure, very numerous, but which are in themselves distinct and discontinuous, although they are connected by the much more numerous acts of imitation which are modelled upon them [TARDE GABRIEL 1903: 2].

Imitation is also inherent in animals, so we can believe it is one of the instincts in the animal world which is clearly visible at least in the activity of ants:

the labours of ants may be very well explained on the principle «of individual initiative followed by imitation» [Ibid: 3].

In the conditions of speech formation, imitation ensures the communicative properties of speech, that is, mutual understanding between people due to the involuntary standardization of sound signals. But even after a human has mastered a language, a good example always affects an observant person. It is the observation of the nature and behavior of other people that can cause a whole series of associations that can lead to the invention of convenient tools, effective tools, or weapons if a person sees not only with his eyes, but also with his mind, but for this he must have potential capabilities in the form brain The world created by God rests on certain unshakable laws, therefore, when the train of thought takes into account these laws, the conclusions correspond to reality. The conclusion validity tested in practice strengthens a person’s trust in his mind and accustoms him to logical thinking within the framework of certain patterns. Those who follow these patterns have successful, long, and healthy lives. Those who neglect them act under the influence of false ideas, do not have success, and cannot imitate others. Thus, the complex process of human thinking develops in society under the influence of various factors during the struggle for existence and is based on two main phenomena – faith and reason. In this case, the mind refers to a person’s ability to acquire knowledge but not metaphysically.

When talking about rational knowledge, it is assumed that there is truth in the most general sense of the word. Humans will not be able to find out the whole truth. He comprehends some part of it with his mind, this part of the knowledge is rational by definition, part is perceived from authority on faith, and part of the truth remains unidentified. This happens regardless of whether the whole truth can be known or not. The presence of the phenomena of reason and faith, as well as unknown truth, has far-reaching consequences, so prophets and thinkers have long attached great importance to the relationship between faith and reason in the knowledge of truth. Saint Augustine seriously considered this problem and, having concluded the paramount importance of faith to authority, put forward the synthesized presumption “I believe for to understand” [GRITSANOV A.A. 2002: 12]. However, authorities could not always convey their knowledge to society, either in their interests or in the interests of society (sometimes misunderstood), they kept their knowledge secret, and esoteric knowledge with privileged access always accompanied the development of human society. There is reason to believe that a certain esoteric doctrine spread among philosophers over the centuries.

Doubt gives rise to a person’s own opinion, but for the most part, a person is inclined to believe fantasies if they give hope for improved living conditions or even for a carefree existence in the future. The life of primitive man passed in poverty and fear of death, the forces of nature and other people; this created discomfort and self-doubt in his soul, and he tried to overcome this state of mind, looking for a means by which this could be done effectively. Faith in one’s knowledge became such a means, and this means turned out to be so effective that faith accompanied a person throughout his existence right up to the present day since fear and uncertainty always accompanied him. Spengler wrote: “Die Weltangst ist sicherlich das Schöpferste aller Urgefühle” [SPENGLER OSWALD. 1920: 116]. This formulation of the German philosopher can only be roughly translated: Fear of the world is an ancient feeling that certainly has the greatest creative potential. Further, Spengler continued: “Reverent fear of all independent of him (person – V.S.), before laws and legality, foreign forces in the world, is the primary source of each and every elementary form of spiritual development” [Ibid: 117]. This opinion was expressed differently by Stuart Firestein, arguing that the driving force of science is ignorance, not knowledge [FIRESYEIN STUART. 2012]. This is true because the unknown often evokes fear, but otherwise it evokes curiosity. That is, in both cases, knowledge begins with overcoming ignorance.

However, there are different forms of ignorance. This topic is developed by G. Matallo, using the term “epistemology of ignorance.” With knowledge, he contrasts not just ignorance, but divides them into two categories – ignorance and stupidity [MATALLO JUNIOR, HEITOR. 2024]. He explains the difference between them like this:

Ignorance becomes stupidity when individuals persistently choose to remain ignorant despite access to information or opportunities for learning and growth. While ignorance refers to a lack of knowledge or awareness about a particular subject, stupidity involves a disregard for facts, reasoning or evidence. Stupidity is intentional. Stupidity manifests itself as an intentional rejection of information that contradicts one’s beliefs or prejudices, leading to completely irrational behaviors or decisions [Ibid: 7-8].

To overcome fear and uncertainty, a person can believe in anything. He can believe in God and the afterlife, but he can do that there is no God and no punishment for sins because this can also help her achieve more or less spiritual comfort. A person can believe in things that bring him practical benefit in everyday life, and in a bright future for himself or at least for his children – in communism or another utopia; he can believe obvious nonsense and it is difficult to overcome such faith, because a person feels that when he loses faith, he feels bad in his soul. At the same time, a strange phenomenon of faith appears – it doesn’t matter what to believe, you just need to do it. For this reason, ignorance flourishes in the world, because not many people doubt their knowledge and are reluctant to accept new things; the majority do not support it.

Those who had the opportunity to verify that some phenomena of the surrounding world can be explained with the help of reason are especially subject to doubt. Such people begin to trust reason more than others, but faith remains a refuge in times of uncertainty or fear. Moreover, although faith in rational knowledge obtained by one’s mind is stronger than faith in authorities, there is a form of truth that a person cannot understand with reason, he can get it when he namely has to believe, so as not to complicate his life. Faith in the process of cognition provides an effect similar to the placebo effect in medicine when a disease is treated with a substance that does not have medicinal properties. In science, the placebo role is played by erroneous theories that people believe in, considering scientists more of an authority than ordinary people. The Ptolemaic system had a placebo effect at one time, satisfying everyone for several centuries. The phlogiston theory dominated much shorter. And in our time there are various pseudo-theories. There are especially many of them in the humanities due to current needs:

Ignorance is often not a mere epistemic fault, but it is also deliberately produced to maintain certain situations, especially those related to domination. Other times it is part of a survival strategy on the part of victimized individuals or populations. The latter are part of the so-called strategic ignorance [Ibid: 3].

As Francis Bacon noted 400 years ago, a person is inclined to believe in what he prefers, while truth cannot always be interesting or useful to him. This concerns especially the questions of the origin of nations and their early history. Mythic historiography can satisfy a person more than unusual and unrecognized results contradict traditional conceptions. However, the mistaken idea of the prehistory of nations disturbs the causal relationship between prehistoric and historical events and its scientific value will be zero. The state policy based on false ideas led to and can lead in the future to catastrophic consequences. A typical example is given by the policy of Nazi Germany, based on the superiority of the so-called Aryan race, even though such a race does not exist at all, although the people known as Aryan are known in history, the Germans have a very distant relation to them.

Despite the temporary success, pseudosciences fade into oblivion but give impetus to new ideas. In this, one can see the positive significance of ignorance for the development of science, although, at the same time, it provokes their virtual-simulative nature. This character is also fueled by political interests and the practice of priority funding of scientific institutions, which dates back to the times of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

If ignorance is maintained consciously, such a practice corresponds to a certain level of morality prevailing in society. Thus, in the interaction of faith, doubt, and morality, the spiritual development of man occurs, in which these phenomena of the human soul interact with the intellect. The first to ask the question about this relationship was, obviously, Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his work “Did the Revival of the Sciences and Arts Сontribute to the Purification of Morality?” Considering science and virtue incompatible, he expressed his opinion in the following artistic form:

O virtue, sublime science of simple souls! Does it actually take so much effort and adaptation to get to know you? Are not your principles engraved on all hearts? And to find out your laws, is it enough to go into yourself and listen to the voice of your conscience when the passions are silent? This is true philosophy, let us learn to be content with it; and, without envying the glory of those famous people who achieve immortality in the republic of scientists, let us try to draw between them and us that honorable difference that was once noticed between two great Nations: one of them knew how to speak well, and the other – to behave well.

Speaking of two nations, Rousseau meant Athens and Sparta. It is clear that Athens represented science and Sparta represented morality. Currently, it is not customary to write about lofty matters in the same lofty style, which little touches the hearts of modern scientists; preference is given to a dry, scientific-like presentation of knowledge. The relationship between science and morality is reflected at a lower level, which was not seen in the times of Newton and Leibniz. Scientific activity is similar to sports – an agonality factor is present in both cases. However, when competing, athletes must demonstrate the principle of “fair play,” which is not clearly expressed in science and depends on the morality of their opponents. This alone suggests that Rousseau was right.

Intellectual development can destroy religion, with existing morality, although it can also give a new impetus to its development. Of course, Kant was right when he argued that moral imaginations are a priori inherent in reason and generated by it, however, by introducing the concept of the categorical imperative, he excluded the possibility of the existence of a goal of morality beyond its boundaries. It is probably possible to view morality in this way from a purely metaphysical perspective since a person can adhere to certain moral norms as a law without realizing their benefits for himself. However, the very change in moral norms indicates their focus on human benefit, which can also be utilitarian. Moreover, the purpose of morality is manifested when it comes to the interests of society.

With the formation of the first social structures, the complication of social relations caused people to need a certain tool to regulate them. Such a tool was the original morality, which united moral and legal norms of behavior in a team. The norms of the original morality were formed from the practical needs of the collective to ensure the safety, health, and growth of its members in a world full of brutal struggles for survival. With the development of an articulate language, the first moral norms, the effectiveness of which had been tested in practice, along with useful experience, were consolidated in the mass consciousness in the form of legends passed on from generation to generation. These legends had both practical and aesthetic meanings. This was the beginning of the organized mental creativity of man, from which later such forms of social consciousness as morality and law, science and art, and, finally, religion developed. Having common roots, these categories in the process of their development remained so closely connected that even in our time it is not easy to delineate the boundary between law and morality, science and religion, even though morality influences law, and religion influences morality, and all this reflected in art. True, science, due to the specific features and laws of its development, has taken a more independent position in the public consciousness to the extent that it is based on real knowledge, and not on dogmas or authorities, as is the case in law, morality, and religion. However, the connection between science and religion is ensured by philosophy as a science of sciences, which tries to link the entire volume of human knowledge into one whole and in some issues intersects with theology.

In learning about the world, a human’s imagination about himself gradually changed. Spengler depicts a human’s first imagination about the world as follows:

In reality, the dark environment of ancient humanity, endowed with a primitive soul, as is still evidenced today by its religious customs and myths, is that world of complete lawlessness, hostile demons, and capricious forces, a thoroughly alive, incomprehensible, unpredictable whole, oscillating into the mysterious [SPENGLER OSWALD. 1920: 141]

You can get acquainted with examples of myths representing such an idea of the world in Ola Hnatjuk’s collection “Witches, Devils and Saints of the Hutsul Region.” To imagine how an archaic worldview can coexist in the modern rational world, evidenced by the facts given by the author in this book. In one of the Hutsul villages, the head of a collective farm and the secretary of the party cell at a peasant meeting accused one woman of taking milk from the collective farm cows [HNATJUK OLA, 1997: 246]. Accordingly, Hutsul myths, preserved from ancient times, may indicate more ancient mythological knowledge. Of course, such a conservative environment is reluctant to accept new ideas but perceives those that flatter national pride.

Due to its practical significance, human rational knowledge, acquired empirically, was the first to separate from the general body of knowledge that occupied humanity in the form of legends. Discovered effective methods of making fire, hunting, fishing, farming, food storage, techniques for making weapons and tools, patterns in natural phenomena, knowledge about the nutritional and medicinal properties of plants, etc. not only changed people’s imagination about the environment but laid the foundations for future sciences that developed in the process of increasing and complicating human needs. Having discovered for himself that certain phenomena are connected and that knowledge of these connections can be useful, a person began to purposefully look for the causes of both positive and negative phenomena. At the same time, she resorted to assumptions that were verified by practice.

Those assumptions refuted by practice were unconditionally rejected, and those that came true were fixed in memory. However, some human assumptions could not be refuted or confirmed by practice. First of all, this concerns assumptions about the causes of natural phenomena, such as, for example, a thunderstorm or snowfall. Since rain and snow fall from above, from where the sun, moonwalk, and the stars shine, it was logical to assume that there was some “sky” up there, and someone lived in the sky and sent rain or snow to the earth. Having mastered the methodology of assumptions, people imperceptibly moved to ideas that calmed their desire to understand natural and astronomical phenomena. Based on these ideas, primitive beliefs developed, although recently there have been reports in the press about scientists’ assumptions that faith in God is genetically embedded in people. If this assumption is true, then it should be considered that this feature of the human psyche only gives impetus to the development of primitive beliefs.

At one time, Buckle concluded about the mental development primacy in its broad sense and confirmed his opinion by analyzing the changes that occurred in the mass consciousness in “the two greatest evils known to mankind” – religious persecution and wars. While quite correctly asserting that there is no example in history where an ignorant person, having good intentions and full power to carry them out, has not done much more harm than good, Buckle is mistaken in concluding that moral feelings are completely incapable even of reducing persecution for faith, and the main enemy of intolerance is not humanity, but knowledge. There is a purely logical error in his reasoning. Even if religious persecution was carried out exclusively by people of impeccable morality, then it does not at all follow that all highly moral people approved of them (Buckle T. 2, 1863, 136). He further argues that intellectual development in Europe led to a weakening of the warlike spirit that had characterized most peoples since ancient times. As an illustration, he cited three outstanding events – the invention of gunpowder, the discovery of political economists, and the advent of steam transport. Firearms made warfare costly and professional, while free trade and new lines of communication brought nations closer together. All this led, as Buckle argued, to the fact that wars in Europe became a rare occurrence. But all these conclusions of his are shattered only when mentioning the two terrible wars that swept across Europe after Buckle’s death.

Spiritual development can be contrasted with physical development in the same way as the soul and body of a person. However, the development of the soul and body must be an interconnected process. Moral and intellectual development must be even more closely related. But in practice, this does not always happen. A highly moral person can be ignorant, and vice versa, a vicious person can be intelligent, this is a consequence of the internal struggle of doubt and faith. However, we can talk about the development of society only when both components in this process proceed harmoniously, not lagging behind each other because it is not enough to have the desire to comply with moral standards, you also need to be convinced of their correctness and know how they can be fulfilled. The moral development of a person is determined by his natural aspirations for goodness and justice. Belief in absolute goodness balanced the rule of the strong, which reigned throughout human history. But it is necessary to separate the evil and good (in the proper sense) intentions of the strong. The opinion exists, defended by Socrates, that no person commits evil consciously. Then, to prevent evil, only rational knowledge is needed. But if there is objective truth in science, then there is none in ethics, that is, one must agree that morality is always subjective, and the development of morality differs from the development of science. It should be added that, from a scientific point of view, the possibility of evil intentions cannot be ruled out. One way or another, the need to determine good and evil has always stood and will stand before man.

Morality has the advantage over science that, unlike science, its laws are established by the human himself, therefore the right to choose can save a person in a critical situation. However, new ideas are put forward both in science and morality by innovators, they are supported by a few, not the majority. Therefore, democratic principles, at least in their pure form, should not operate in the assessment of both moral norms and scientific ideas. Morality appears to be the most flexible and changeable form of social consciousness because people do not always comply with moral norms, which in principle should not change. Defining such standards and complying with them should be a very significant matter. Bertrand Russell wrote about one of these norms:

In studying a philosopher, the right attitude is neither reverence nor contempt, but first a kind of hypothetical sympathy, until it is possible to know what it feels like to believe in his theories, and only then a revival of the critical attitude, which should resemble, as far as possible, the state of mind of a person abandoning opinions which he has hitherto held [RUSSELL BERTRAND. 1945:39].

Perhaps such behavior is not a purely moral norm but is inherent in some people due to their character, it is thanks to them that new ideas can find universal acceptance, contributing to the development of science. Conversely, the lack of advance goodwill hinders its development, especially in those areas where a new idea cannot be tested in practice. Awareness of the importance of such an approach to new ideas has not yet become a moral imperative in scientific circles, its adoption as a norm of behavior can’t help but be useful for the development of science. This particular example not only confirms the connection between science and morality but also illustrates one possible direction for the development of morality.

The importance of morals in society as a whole is underestimated. When I write in comments to articles on topical issues that all our problems are solved in the sphere of morality, other readers ridicule me. The general public places all its hopes on strict laws, without understanding that in a society where people are willing to take and give money for the right to break the law, no law will apply. However, in the scientific community, the attitude toward morality is changing:

Only recently have economists again realized both the importance of the concepts of “morality” and “trust”, without which it is impossible to assess the effectiveness of a social institution, the level of the judicial system, business ethics, corruption, etc., and the importance of studying their impact on the economy and acceleration economic growth [SEDLÁČEK TOMÁŠ. 2016: 117].

A lot can be written on the reason topic, faith, and morality, and based on the written, an important conclusion can be drawn. A person does not doubt his knowledge when he firmly believes in it. It is impossible to overcome faith with the power of logic and facts; how could a recognized authority do this, but this is also thanks to believing him. A person’s faith in his knowledge is stronger when he comes to it on his own, by the power of his mind. When a person is not psychologically ready to perceive a new truth, there is no point in convincing him, but the same person will accept a new idea or theory if he reaches the truth in his own way. There is no doubt that the process of cognition is gradual and a person must acquire fundamentally new knowledge based on what has already been acquired by faith and reason. The principle of step-by-step learning of the world is common and can provide an answer to the so-called “Fermi paradox”. As you know, this Italian physicist asked why more developed space civilizations, which according to the laws of physics and probability theory should exist, have not yet contacted earthlings. They adhere to this principle, knowing that the assimilation of certain achievements by earthlings is impossible without passing through a certain stage of development, which cannot be jumped over or bypassed.

Thus, the truth does not need to be proven, it is enough just to publish it for the general public. The one who accepts it will succeed, and the one who does not perceive it will become a victim of his own obscurantism. This somewhat corresponds to the parable of Jesus Christ about the wedding feast, which ends with the words “Many are called, but few are chosen.”

However, the truth is not always useful, sometimes it can even be harmful (for example, it is not customary to tell the truth to a sick person). Since people willingly believe in the truth that is pleasant to them, on the contrary, they may not believe the truth that they do not like. This is how knowledge arises that can be brought into esoteric classes and which is used only by the elite, the initiated. This is how the structuring of human society is organically formed. This has been the case for centuries, and if you try to make any information publicly available, it can only cause harm to society, and it is not without reason that every state has bodies that protect secret data.

Literature

Abbreviation

HPE – Istoria filosofii. Entsikolopedia – (in Russian) – History of Philosophy. Encyclopedia.

Andersen Hans Christian. 1837. The Emperor’s New Clothes.

Russell Bertrand. 1945. A History of Western Philosophy. New York. Simon&Schuster.

Buckle H.T. 1863. Istoria tsivilizatsii v Anglii – (In Russian) – History of Civilization in England. Saint Petersburg.

Collingwood R.G. 1946. The Idea of History. Oxford. At the Clarendon Press.

Descartes René. 1644. Principia Philosophiae

Firestein, S. 2012. Ignorance: How It Drives Science, Oxford University Press

Fromm Erich. 1976. To Have or to Be

Gritsanov A.A. 2002. Avgustin Blazhenyi – (In Russian) – Augustinus Sanctus//HPE. Minsk.

Hnatiuk Ola. 1997. Wiedźmy, czarty, i święci Huculszczyzny. Mity i legendy – (In Polish) – Witches, Devils and Saints of the Hutsul Region. Warszawa.

Hume David. 1739–1740. A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects

John Paul II. 1998. Encyclical Letter “Fides et Ratio” to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the relationship between faith and reason. V. 13.

Kant Immanuel. 1781. Critique of Pure Reason.

Matallo Junior, Heitor. 2024. Knowledge, Ignorance, and Stupidity in the Context of the Epistemology of Ignorance. Independent Scholar, Campinas, Brazil.

Sedláček Tomáš. 2016. Eknomika dobra i zla. V poiskakh smysla ekonomiki ot Gil’gamesha do Wall Street – (In Russian) – Economics of Good and Evil. Finding the Meaning of Economics from Gilgamesh to Wall Street. Moscow. «Ad Marginem Press».

Spengler Oswald. 1920-1922. Der Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte – (In German) – The Decline of the West. Outlines of a Morphology of World History. Munich.

Tarde Gabriel. 1903. The Laws of Imitation. Henry Holt and Company.

Vico Giambattista. 1708. De Nostri Temporis Studiorum Ratione