it is a prerequisite that you think you are entitled to your own beliefs
Not clear what “entitled” means. In some senses of this word, being entitled to your own beliefs is a bad idea, as in “I’m entitled to my own opinion” spoken in the face of disagreeable evidence.
[that] your beliefs matter,
What does “matter” mean? On what scale, and why does the scale matter? If it’s a matter of being worth paying attention to on the margin, then it may be a question of goals and ability. It’s plausible that for many people life outcomes won’t depend very much on large classes of their beliefs, that paying attention to things other than such beliefs would be more efficient.
[that] you think your actions follow your own beliefs and not from commands issued by others,
Perhaps you are in a subordinate role, so your actions do follow from commands issued by others, but this is compatible with them following from your own beliefs, or from today’s weather.
[that] your actions can make a difference, at the very least in your own life.
Very bad decisions are easy to invent, so clearly your actions can make a difference. The real question is whether at the margin the best you can do can be improved efficiently enough to make this kind of activity a good idea.
It means not-even-attire. When you are not simply following an authority in the sense of “I trust it because X said it” but more in the sense of “X said it, it is not my job to trust, just to obey” it can be called not feeling entitled to judge. The attitude of the bureaucratic clerk who follows rules not because he trusts the higher ups make good rules but because he feels it is not his job to judge if the rules are good.
What does “matter” mean?
Beliefs that matter may either change your own actions or other people’s actions by them listening to you.
Very bad decisions are easy to invent
They tend to be illegal or at least socially disapproved which is kind of the point. It is easy to be safe as a conformist who just obeys. They put warning labels on everything these days :)
It is easy to be safe as a conformist who just obeys.
Not necessarily. That depends on whether the social rules contains good advice. For example, in the Soviet Union blindly obeying all the official commands may very well cause you to starve. Hence most people cheated the system any way they could get away with. While as you observed they wouldn’t openly question the official doctrine, their actions tell a different story.
Hm, this is a good point. Clearly felt needs clearly override that. I was thinking more amonst the lines of office red-tape rules conformism, religious etc.
Not clear what “entitled” means. In some senses of this word, being entitled to your own beliefs is a bad idea, as in “I’m entitled to my own opinion” spoken in the face of disagreeable evidence.
What does “matter” mean? On what scale, and why does the scale matter? If it’s a matter of being worth paying attention to on the margin, then it may be a question of goals and ability. It’s plausible that for many people life outcomes won’t depend very much on large classes of their beliefs, that paying attention to things other than such beliefs would be more efficient.
Perhaps you are in a subordinate role, so your actions do follow from commands issued by others, but this is compatible with them following from your own beliefs, or from today’s weather.
Very bad decisions are easy to invent, so clearly your actions can make a difference. The real question is whether at the margin the best you can do can be improved efficiently enough to make this kind of activity a good idea.
It means not-even-attire. When you are not simply following an authority in the sense of “I trust it because X said it” but more in the sense of “X said it, it is not my job to trust, just to obey” it can be called not feeling entitled to judge. The attitude of the bureaucratic clerk who follows rules not because he trusts the higher ups make good rules but because he feels it is not his job to judge if the rules are good.
Beliefs that matter may either change your own actions or other people’s actions by them listening to you.
They tend to be illegal or at least socially disapproved which is kind of the point. It is easy to be safe as a conformist who just obeys. They put warning labels on everything these days :)
Not necessarily. That depends on whether the social rules contains good advice. For example, in the Soviet Union blindly obeying all the official commands may very well cause you to starve. Hence most people cheated the system any way they could get away with. While as you observed they wouldn’t openly question the official doctrine, their actions tell a different story.
Hm, this is a good point. Clearly felt needs clearly override that. I was thinking more amonst the lines of office red-tape rules conformism, religious etc.