ernst tischler wrote:
alief = fancy Yale term for "roller coaster syndrome"  LOL

Yep +1

Zack Zoll wrote:
Not sure we needed a word for it. Not sure we didn't either though.

We've been able to describe the concept just fine for millenia, but having a term for it allows us to describe it quickly. It also has the potential to do away with the more intricate descriptions we usually use to describe a human condition. Sometimes the short, terse description robs us of just a little bit of that humanity.

But sometimes not.

I'm reminded of a line from the Sandman graphic novels. I'm paraphrasing from memory:

"What's the name for when you can't remember what an old lover smells like anymore?"
"Mercy."

Sounds like some sorta newspeak to me.

And a person who believes in racial equality may nonetheless have aliefs that cause them to treat people of different racial groups in subtly different ways.

I see where this nonsense is intended to go.

A person who is hesitant to eat fudge that has been formed into the shape of feces, or who exhibits reluctance in drinking from a sterilized bedpan may believe that the substances are safe to eat and drink, but may alieve that they are not.

I see where this nonsense is intended to go.

Bobby C wrote:
From the OP


I see where this nonsense is intended to go.

LOL

ernst tischler wrote:
.......

DOA

Bobby C wrote:
DOA

ROFLMAO

ernst tischler wrote:
From the OP:


I see where this nonsense is intended to go.

It's just a conscious/unconscious knowledge or belief thing. My issue with giving it a label, and removing the human element by discussing it in terms of tenses instead of in terms of people, is that it polarizes everything, and makes it black and white,right and wrong. People are not black and white.

I'm going to use a less overtly racist example. PLEASE keep in mind that I am making absolutely no judgement on the right and wrong of the speaker,and ONLY discussing the world 'alief.'

A politician is being interviewed on TV, and he says that we need to crack down on hoodlums and thugs.

Now today, we know that 'hoodlum' is a phrase often used to describe criminals that are specifically black. Originally, it meant the Irish. Or the Scottish- I forget which. But it was originally a term used in England to describe 'uncivilized' people from the UK. Thug has a similar history.

If we speak in terms of alief, we would say that this person may be all for racial equality, but he alieves that blacks are more likely to be criminals. That's what all those words mean, so that's how we take it.

If we take a human tact, we would say that he consciously knows he wants racial equality, but he subconsciously used the word hoodlum or thug or whatever, because those are the words ingrained in his mind. Your average politician is older, which means that to him, hoodlum or thug probably means Italian person. My grandmother used to talk about all the thugs on Jersey Shore, and she's an Italian from Long Island!

Or maybe he really was referring to black people, and he was using the 'new PC' code. But then it's not unconscious, is it?

By boiling it all down to a single word or concept, what we are doing is simplifying the conversation. Which can be good. But it also means that we are turning beliefs into 'you are right', and 'you are wrong.' Instead of discussing ingrained or other unconscious ideas, we're discussing 'beliefs' and 'true beliefs.'