Belief System Analysis

Why there is a need for it

Although technology is developing rapidly, the tools available to help us to think about and discuss beliefs are virtually non-existent. For instance, mind maps are a useful tool for brainstorming and organising information, but are of very limited use when it comes to beliefs. I think that this lack of tools is for two main reasons:

• Beliefs come in systems: the reason that you believe something is because it fits with the rest of your belief system. But belief system are often too complex to summarise in a soundbite, a sermon or an academic journal. This means that any presentation of a point of view is like an iceberg in which most of the viewpoint is hidden. What is worse, it is usually the most important part of the viewpoint which is hidden, namely the assumptions upon which it is based and which are the source of any disagreement. Sometimes this may be deliberate, but generally it is because the communicator is not even aware themselves of the assumptions they are making! This means that debates inevitably end up as slanging matches where both sides are talking at cross-purposes given their different assumptions, and no progress is made since the assumptions are never revealed. If we are to make progress in thinking about complex issues we therefore have to bite the bullet and start communicating in terms of belief systems.

• Beliefs are linked by logic: beliefs should be connected within systems through logical argument, but the logic is very rarely presented in a clear way. This is probably partly due to the dry nature of logical argument, and partly to the intellectual rigor it requires and which people either are afraid to apply to their arguments, or simply too lazy! But it again has damaging consequences, since not only are the arguments unclear, but it is not possible to assess how valid they are.

How it works

The method of Belief System Analysis provides a simple solution to these two problems, which is to show belief systems graphically. Beliefs are put in boxes and the logical arguments connecting them are represented by arrows. For instance, in the simple logical argument presented below, the two boxes on the left represent the premises, and the box that the arrows are pointing to is the conclusion.


Of course, in order for this argument to be justified, the two premises must themselves be the conclusions of logical arguments. To do this, you simply insert more boxes whose arrows of logic point to them. This has been done for one of the premises below. Equally, the original conclusion can itself be a premise of an argument, which is also added below.

I hope you are starting to see the potential of this now. Logical arguments can be presented in an extremely clear but also interesting way, and be easily built up to describe whole belief systems.


Tools

Belief System Analysis consists of the following two tools:

• Belief Maps: how to map out a belief system in a way that can be clearly understood, and that allows analysis of how coherent it is.

• Belief System Debate: how to use Belief Maps to improve the efficiency of intellectual debate - the days are numbered for slanging matches that get nowhere!

The best software for Belief System Analysis this is called Visual Concept. Microsoft Excel can also be used, but Visual Concept allows you to link boxes much faster and to create clusters of boxes which can be easily moved around. The main thing that needs to be added to Visual Concept to make it fully operational for Belief System Analysis, is the ability to calculate the Coherence Quotient.