Is belief a choice?

  
There's an interesting connection between free-will with the nature of belief, and this is often at the root of key differences of opinion I have with Christian (and Muslim) Apologists.  For example, the idea that free will is an illusion threatens the belief in God, from an Apologist point of view. I don't think it does but anyway... why is the nature of free will and belief such a touchy subject for Apologists?  Would it help if Apologists understood the processes by which humans come to believe what they believe?

Apologists who insist that belief is a choice are taking a philosophical view known as Voluntarism. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy...

"Voluntarism is any philosophical view that makes our ability to control the phenomena in question an essential part of the correct understanding of those phenomena. Doxastic voluntarism is the doctrine that we have extensive control over what we believe; we choose what to believe. A special case of doxastic voluntarism is theological voluntarism, which implies that religious belief requires a substantial element of choice; the evidence alone cannot decide the issue.  This is a view closely associated with Pascal, Kierkegaard, and James."

In other words, we can control what we believe much in the way that we control our actions. Apologists adopt this argument because disbelief is considered sinful, and this is only possible if we can be held morally responsible for our beliefs. The fundamentalists who tell me I will burn in a lake of fire have no credible argument if I can't be held accountable for my opinion that the existence of their god is unlikely. 

Related to this is the "paradox of grace" which Donald Baillie, Professor of Systematic Theology at the University of St. Andrews describes:

"Its essence lies in the conviction which a Christian man possesses, that every good thing in him, every good thing he does, is somehow not wrought by himself but by God. This is a highly paradoxical conviction, for in ascribing all to God it does not abrogate human personality nor disclaim personal responsibility."  

Or as Paul wrote:

"By God’s grace I am what I am, and his grace to me has not proved vain; in my labours I have outdone them all - not I, indeed, but the grace of God working with me." (1 Corinthians 15:10)

So the Apologist will argue that a Christian has a responsibility to believe what is uncertain - or even what is impossible. But the power to do this comes from God.  Kierkegaard suggested that belief in Christian doctrine was in itself a virtue, precisely because it is impossible for that doctrine to be true.  Fundamentalists tell me I have chosen to be an atheist and I will suffer for this for eternity, unless I choose to believe in their religion (choose Jesus, or choose Allah or Mohammed or whatever). And that choice will save me. 

In the other corner we have Involuntarism which argues that we cannot choose to believe, because belief is not an action.  When we make a choice,  that choice is not a choice until the action is taken. But when we believe something, that's it. There is no action. 

When I present my views to religious Apologists I explain that I consider the existence of their particular god unlikely because of the weakness of the evidence and the lack of verification.  They will often insist that my view is a "choice".   But the fact is that, by default, I don't know if gods exist, and my belief in anything can only come from what I know and the evidence I've seen.  I cannot choose to believe in the existence of gods in exactly the same way that I cannot choose to believe in elves or goblins.  I need evidence and verification to believe something, and that's what causes belief, not "choice."  If there is a desk in an office, I don't "choose" to believe the desk is there.  My belief is the logical result of what I know. 

So a belief is not an action - but actions lead to beliefs. These actions could include talking to people, reading books, watching TV, researching, attending lectures... any number of ways that human beings acquire information. But belief is also influenced by how we process the information, how credulous or sceptical we are, our state of mind, and other factors. For example, people who are deluded will believe something is true even when strong evidence is presented that demonstrates it can't be true. Sometimes people will come to believe something because that belief fulfils a need or brings comfort.  From my personal point of view, I am unable to use faith as the basis of belief, hence I cannot believe anything that has not been verified. 

Another charge I receive from Apologists and Fundamentalists is that I chose atheism as a way to avoid taking moral responsibility, or so I can live a life of greed and selfishness. The fact is I had no choice what I believed, and I just can't "choose" to start believing in gods. Compelling evidence would result in me believing in a god or gods, and I always have the option to pretend to believe - to act as if I believe.  Perhaps some Christians and Muslims do just that.