Not sure hillary vs. obama is a belief system thing, but one could argue that it is, because people tend to vote on party lines (depending on which party they belong to).

On the crime statistics you reported. The problem is, in India crime statistics is notoriously hard to obtain, especially crimes against women – rapes etc go unreported because the burden of proof is on the woman – a classic trait of a male-chauvinistic system. So comparing India’s crime statistics with the USA is a flawed comparison and in the same way using what i call as the “Trophy Progress” argument – namely, Indira Gandhi, Indra Nooyi and Jayalalitha are there in positions of high power and hence Indian women are better off than American women. Another instance of flawed logic.

It is going to be very hard to come up an example where there are 2 equally opposing arguments both based on scientifically obtained evidence? Yes, it is possible, but most often, one side is using flawed logic and refuse to accept it due to the confirmation bias.

* I will write my own post on caste system..

* I will also write a post on god telling too… if possible, i will interview the person who had that “God telling”.. based on my observance, i feel, its NOT due to drug or psychological disturbance..

* I would quote the hillary vs obama campaign.. both are equally capable.. this is an example where both sides have such large number of delegates (more than 1500 each) and believe their respective candidate is right choice.., and both sides are valid in many points.

Some general scenario where both sides have equal valid points may occur in interpretation of data.. For example, in our earlier discussions on priya’s post on status of women, i gave a statistics on number of crimes in both india and US. But our interpretations are completely opposite, which i feel valid in both terms.. (probably you may feel, i am totally wrong)

Yes, Opinions are created using a belief system. That is correct.

“God Telling” – I did not deny that it existed. I have seen it myself. Whether it is a legitimate scientific phenomenon or not is the question. It is not a scientific phenomenon. It is either put on, or they are under the influence of some drug or they have some sort of a psychological disturbance – possibly due to a temporal lobe malfunction in the brain. If you are really interested in why God Telling happens, you may want to do some research on the Internet.

Caste system is evil. The fact that you hold a positive view of it because you have seen it in your village does not make it evidence. If you want to prove that caste system is not evil, please collect data. Goto several places, talk to people, understand how the caste system and then do a blog post or write a scientific paper, and then we can have a discussion.

Yes, level of experience affects one’s belief. Absolutely.

You are right, confirmation bias occurs when one’s attempt to defend one’s beliefs.

Please give an example of when both sides are correct and have valid points?

i feel, both opinion and belief system induce each other.. Also, the differences in experiences of the people, social background, and the way the people grown out, also plays a factor.. for example, regarding the “God Telling” example i quoted in your egypt blog, you had outrightly rejected.. but, the next week, i saw another god telling in my gula temple, and i just verified directly whether its spontaneous or pre-planned.. it was spontaneous.. before that, it was my opinion, but after that incident, my opinion got transformed in to a strong belief, that this “god telling” is a way of rural spirituality..

Secondly for caste system, i came from the very caste background that you term it as evil and still living in that environment.. i have a first hand experience of this system, and hence could understand more than others.. And still the village setup very much exists in both my village and my relative’s villages.. so anything that we argue, i could verify at the ground level.. that’s why i am strongly advocating against terming it as evil.. i have been analysing the caste system for past two years, and i should thank you for providing valuable links in your earlier post, which gave new insights to me..

The level of one’s experience also shapes one’s belief..

I agree with your confirmation bias. it occurs more due to taking sides and attempting to defend one’s belief system.. but, can we term it as confirmation bias, when both the sides has valid points, but believe in opposite things..

Opinions are formed based on one’s belief system. Like you say, i dont think anyone will believe something unless they are convinced of its validity. However, what is convincing to one person may not be convincing to another. For instance, i am convinced that the caste system is evil. Whereas you think caste system is noble. Which belief is correct? Sometimes the passage of time can show up the truth. For instance, it was common knowledge that the earth is flat. Now we have incontrovertible proof that the earth is spherical. By the same token, some beliefs may never get settled by the passage of time.

You say, when your belief is challenged, you don’t change untill you know why you are wrong. This is good. However, the add-on i would propose is this – when your belief is chalenged, try to argue why that challenge is correct and try to see if there is more evidence in favor of the new challenge. Typically, what people do (the essence of my post) is when their belief is challenged they seek more evidence on why their current belief is correct or why this new challenge is incorrect. This is known as the confirmation bias.

A person with a sound belief system tries to avoid confirmation bias.

Hope that helps?