A Multi-dimensional Assessment of Belief

"But out of limitations comes creativity."

I find myself lamenting the limitations of the standard believer/nonbeliever dichotomy. More specifically, I hate that the word 'skeptic' has come to signify a dogmatic group to which one belongs, rather than an esteemed state of critical thinking. It got me thinking about why a person holds a particular set of beliefs, and how we might more accurately identify the reasons for a person's adherence to a particular belief.

So here's today's two-bit attempt at improving the world.

Think of this as a Myers-Briggs type personality assessment. (I'll have a name for it by the end of this post.) Let me explain the dimensions...

Self <-------> Authority (Source of Beliefs)
This dimension reflects the likely source of a person's beliefs. Is he a critical thinker who examines arguments and evidence for himself before reaching a decision? Or is he content to let an accepted authority figure tell him what is right/wrong?

Diverse <-------> Homogeneous (Environmental Preference)
This dimension reflects a person's preference for social environment. Does he prefer a diverse group of friends with differing beliefs? Or is he more comfortable associating with people who possess similar beliefs and values?

Uncertain <-------> Certain (Tolerance for Uncertainty)
This dimension reflects a person's tolerance for uncertainty. Is he willing to act on information that he is not completely certain about (high tolerance for uncertainty), or is he likely to hold off on acting in the face of uncertainty?

I would argue that these dimensions are autonomous enough that a score on one scale does not necessarily predict scores on the other scales. But that's just my hunch. Certainly you could see where a person who had a higher tolerance for uncertainty might prefer a more diverse social group, but it need not follow. A person who is required by some other aspect of his life to have a high tolerance for uncertainty may actually prefer a more homogeneous social group. (There are limits to our ability to tolerate uncertainty.)

What would this scale be useful for? In theory, it could predict a person's tendency toward affiliations with belief-based groups, and their willingness to act based in support of that affiliation. A person who prefers a homogeneous social group, but who is not willing to accept 'truth' from authority, may be less likely to commit aggressive acts in the name of that group's agenda. A person who prefers a homogeneous social group, and who has a low tolerance for uncertainty, may react more aggressively to perceived threats to that group's stability, whether ideological or social.

Here's an interesting quote that I found in the blogosphere today - "We can signal loyalty to a group by showing our confidence in its beliefs. And our ability to offer many reasonable arguments for its beliefs suggests such confidence. But sometimes we can show even stronger loyalty by showing a willingness to embrace unreasonable arguments for our group’s beliefs. Someone who supports a group because he thinks it has reasonable supporting arguments might well desert that group should he find better arguments against it. Someone willing to embrace unreasonable arguments for his group shows a willingness to continue supporting them no matter which way the argument winds blow." (q) This quote suggests that parsing the reasons why a person holds a particular beliefs (especially one whose 'truth' value is questionable) might be of value in predicting their actions.

For all I know, something similar already exists. I still don't know what to call my proposed assessment, so I'm having a hard time googling for something similar. (I did find a few interesting things though.) My apologies if I reinvented your wheel.

In addition to the uses I've just described, I'd like to see people substitute this three-part self-assessment any time they feel like identifying themselves as a 'believer' or a 'skeptic' of any kind. At the very least we'll be getting a more honest picture of why you hold that viewpoint.

So... who has some grant money for me to develop this idea? :)