What did Nietzsche mean when he said that "Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies?"

[DisillusionedCitizen]

This quote came into my mind yesterday, and I was wondering Nietsche meant when he said this. Does anyone have any ideas?

 

[Sonne]

Some people will not give up their beliefs even when the truth is revealed. That is why it is more important to know than to believe.

 

[Sonapanic]

The way I would interpret is that lies can easily be discerned when one knows the truth. Also, half-truths are more dangerous than outright lies.
Convictions share the similar danger as half-truths, because the convinced person is wrong, but he thinks he is right, so he steadfastly holds onto the conviction. This can in the process create more harm than lies, because lies are dispelled by truth, but conviction cannot be overturned so easily, it has to be fought against.

 

[SShiva_fr]

Convictions are a system of voluntarily chosen beliefs.
Because of the principle of coherence, the individual will reinforce his belief system in order to support his convictions and ensure that all his actions and words are consistent with his convictions.
And this can be done at the expense of the Truth. It can be self-deception.
The individual may be unaware of this self-deception.

Lies, on the other hand, are deliberate deception, done with a clear conscience.
The individual is more likely to know where the truth lies.

Maybe.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

Being so stubbornly attached to an idea that you will refuse to ever think about anything else being possible. It is not possible for these people to learn anything because they refuse to listen to anything. Being closed minded and broken.

If somebody is simply lying about something, it could still be possible to reason with that person. What is the reason for you to lie? What are you trying to accomplish? Do you really think that you are telling the truth? What about this other information that you didn't know about? And the person could be some amount open to learning something.

 

[Alexandros Iowno [JG]]

Change and adaptation are necessary, and this will work to reveal. To change and adapt is always thought in a single dimensional line, change is seen as from truth to lie, but the change that must come must happen on the exclusive dimension of truth. That means change of perspective, acquiring depth, seeing the complexity, understanding the whole, whereas a conviction can be a limitation in the consciousness in the context that Nietzsche wrote. A wall that is a conviction will be continually built or held by the person, a wall of lies will always crumble by lack of foundations and verified reality, truth. It is a matter of nuance here and understanding by experience all of these things. The above does not mean to have convictions is wrong, as the nature of the mind is to have them sometimes, it is a state of a judgement one arrives or accepts, but the content and the essence of it is what matters, and there is the danger. The stance here being, one must be aware of this.

Have you dealt with a xian who has certain convictions? Some lies can be disproven, a machinery that has "convictions" will endlessly create these lies.
Convictions can bring justification of falsehood, as it can come from a place of no knowledge but simple belief or overreaching of the mind.

 

[FancyMancy]

Being convinced of something usually makes one unwilling to change their mind. It is, or becomes, "their" "opinion", but what it actually is, if they are easy to influence and for some brought-up among similar things, is brainwashing which buries so deeply, and the person becomes uncomfortable or defensive to opposition or challenge. Take christians - they are, or soon become, convinced of all of that christian nonsense; this is contrary to the truth. Atheists and Spiritual Satanists know that christianity is a lie.

For christians - especially the hardcore and fundamental ones - it is repeated repeatedly, and this strengthens the conviction. For atheists, they - and Spiritual Satanists, we - brush it off and ignore it and get on with our lives. As christians are more or less commanded to "bear their own cross", they carry burdens upon themselves which weigh them down and blame Satan for it, and call "god"* "good"; christians literally are living their own christian-hell. The deeper they go the stronger it becomes and more difficult or impossible to escape from, and they think Satan is the baddie.

Consider the roots of a tree. If one is travelling along the road of life, and they are in an accident, one piece of advice that anyone can give is "If you're going to hit anything, don't hit a tree"; the roots will not let the tree be removed. They bury so deeply and spread widely and grip the fertile Mind and Soul of the christian. This "tree of life" is poison - look what happened to "adam and eve"; they ate of the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" and then "sin entered the World" and people died. "god" planted a poison apple** tree. The roots of the poison tree of christianity bury and grip and are relentless, and the poison from the tree of christianity kills the christian - and in history if not today, kills non-believers.

The conviction that the christian has is so much more powerful and damning for - rather, against - the christian than it is against atheists and Spiritual Satanists. Convictions grip one very, very tightly, and don't let go. It is a form of Karma - the direction they are going in life, building-up all of that momentum behind them like a cargo lorry or freight train, the momentum carries them into that way, that direction in life, and it becomes increasingly difficult or impossible to slow down or change. When applying the brakes, we understand friction and heat happens, and that causes problems for people, especially if they are 'backsliding' from christianity - it is not always an easy process, but (the metaphor is being stretched here) if it is possible that the lorry/train is stopped, then the brakes and tires/wheels can be repaired or replaced and the lorry or freight train can go elsewhere, turning over a new leaf, having a different life.

*"jehova", in its original hebrew, means "god of evil"
**as depicted

 

[FancyMancy]

I should mention that I haven't read Nietzsche, so I can't say exactly what I think he meant. I simply add my own interpretation of the phrase you quoted.

 

[Dragonheart666]

Conviction firmly means that you believe in something? And something that is right for you and you only! As an individual and going along with your heart and your feelings? If you believe in something or feel comfortable with it. And sticking to your beliefs and who and what you are as a person. And a lot of Christians portray that. And some of them don't depending on what type of Christian a church or cult? They belong to. Such as for example? In the Mormon church we had something called the Nietzsche priesthood. And they were always preaching about people's opinions and what they believe in? Versus what a person should believe in and value, forcing their opinion on you and telling you what you think you should live and how you should think. Without question or conviction.

 

[Dragonheart666]

Christians are people who will eventually wipe themselves out.

 

[DisillusionedCitizen]

Change and adaptation are necessary, and this will work to reveal. To change and adapt is always thought in a single dimensional line, change is seen as from truth to lie, but the change that must come must happen on the exclusive dimension of truth. That means change of perspective, acquiring depth, seeing the complexity, understanding the whole, whereas a conviction can be a limitation in the consciousness in the context that Nietzsche wrote. A wall that is a conviction will be continually built or held by the person, a wall of lies will always crumble by lack of foundations and verified reality, truth. It is a matter of nuance here and understanding by experience all of these things. The above does not mean to have convictions is wrong, as the nature of the mind is to have them sometimes, it is a state of a judgement one arrives or accepts, but the content and the essence of it is what matters, and there is the danger. The stance here being, one must be aware of this.

Have you dealt with a xian who has certain convictions? Some lies can be disproven, a machinery that has "convictions" will endlessly create these lies.
Convictions can bring justification of falsehood, as it can come from a place of no knowledge but simple belief or overreaching of the mind.

Are there any convictions does the West have that prevents them from taking action against the Jew? If so, what?

 

[DisillusionedCitizen]

There's also another Nietzsche quote on my mind: What did he mean when he said that hope is "the worst of all evils because it prolongs the suffering of man?"

 

[onestas]

When you have Absolute certains,you Will be closed in yourself, if you superate them you Will be free because they are chain which avoid the change, so you have tò leave your conviction and be open to dialogue. Example: if you believe a wrong idea,but you are convincted of that when Someone says you "see it Is not this way" you learn you are slave of your mentale system.

 

[DisillusionedCitizen]

When you have Absolute certains,you Will be closed in yourself, if you superate them you Will be free because they are chain which avoid the change, so you have tò leave your conviction and be open to dialogue. Example: if you believe a wrong idea,but you are convincted of that when Someone says you "see it Is not this way" you learn you are slave of your mentale system.

I'm merely bumping this to say thank you for the advice.

 

[DisillusionedCitizen]

I'm bumping this again to poat this from an empty thread no one reaponded to:

Convictions are beliefs that are fixed and firmly held. To a large number of people today, convictions are important as they are said to carry people throughout their lives, voice their experiences, help them give a vision on how to achieve their goals, and solidify their future. As those same number of people sing praises of conviction being a strength, there is, however, at least a logical flaw in a personal conviction, one that tends to be ignored and might come to bite its advocates if they’re not careful in their assessment of the subject matter, and that Frederich Nietzsche had implied: Personal convictions, when reinforced by too many successful examples (largely due to effort of the person with personal convictions themselves), tend to create an illusion of truth; this unfortunately leads people to mistake their own personal convictions as the truth. In a more extreme example, when a person’s personal convictions are proven wrong, they are inclined to double down in an attempt to stamp out any doubt and go as far as to make it a constant. This isn’t so bad on a social/inspirational aspect, but on a logical aspect, this doesn’t hold as much water; a person can speak with conviction within their group to convince them this works, but if and when this is mixed with lies, let alone built on one, things can end very badly.

A large number of people highly overestimate the positives of having personal convictions while ignoring (and thus severely underestimate) the negatives, hoping it won’t hinder them too badly. Having doubt is not a bad thing, but it’s unfortunately seen as a weakness. Speaking of weakness, A large number of people think they can only be attacked on their weak points, but they’re mistaken, they can also be attacked on their strong points as well, and given that people with convictions want others to see the perks of conviction, I think they’re making a big mistake doing this; because people with personal convictions are confident and pursue consistency, they’re going to be taken off-guard when an infiltrator undermines their message or frame it in a way that the convictions were proven true.

The most pronounced example are pacifists/anti-war activists/conscientious objectors; they firmly believe in their confidence that words and emotions can come through to even tyrants and dictators, whom can be taken accountable for their actions. Such people, however, can play along and frame it in a way that their opposition's convictions had appeared to be proven true. Gandhi's actions were framed in the official narrative in a way that make his beliefs appear true to the people of the public, themselves knowing none the wiser and instead adopt that conviction.
Convictions are not as useful as the majority make it out to be. One other possible flaw is whatever conviction was proven true in the short run may not be as consistent/factual in the long run. If anything, a person with personal conviction can be fed in a similar way an internet troll can be fed; the only difference is that what the internet troll does is almost always an honest attempt to enrage people, whereas while people with conviction mean well in their efforts to prove their beliefs and, in some extremes, go as far as to make them factual (otherwise, they'd just another example to prove their point), they possibly lie to themselves by pure accident and don't realize that they just created a generator of lies. With personal convictions, there's an irony that has some tragic implications: What a majority of civilians think to be an instrument of strength, truth, and consistency is little more than a breeding ground for falsehoods and lies; at worst, people with personal convictions can accidentally aid a tyrant in their lies if they're not careful, but then again, since people hold convictions mainly to inspire others, only a small number of people rethink their belief systems, with fewer even doing so repeatedly.

Maybe this is part of why most gentiles are having a hard time figuring out Jewish deception? This takes the phrase "keeping up appearances" on a new level.