Summary

The author argues that doubt, when used constructively by thinkers, is a valuable tool for personal growth and maintaining a flexible, confident mindset.

Abstract

The article presents a nuanced perspective on doubt, suggesting that it is not inherently negative but rather a catalyst for intellectual and personal development. The author draws on the unconventional wisdom of their lumberjack-physiotherapist uncle, who embodies the idea of a "rural eccentric" and emphasizes the importance of doubt in free thinking. The piece distinguishes between different types of doubt, advocating for a balanced approach where doubt coexists with confidence, and is used selectively rather than constantly. By revisiting beliefs in light of new information, the author posits that doubt can lead to a deeper understanding of the world, akin to the scientific method. The article concludes by cautioning against unfocused doubt, which can lead to paralysis, and instead champions the constructive doubt of thinkers as the most beneficial for growth.

Opinions

Doubt is seen as a sign of weakness in a post-positivism world where confidence is highly valued.
The author's uncle, a lumberjack-physiotherapist, is cited as a confident individual who embraces doubt as part of his identity and thought process.
Confidence and doubt are not mutually exclusive; one can be confident in their identity and abilities while still allowing for doubt in their beliefs.
Constructive doubt is about questioning specific beliefs in light of new evidence, not about doubting everything indiscriminately.
Useful doubt is akin to a test, with a clear objective of finding an answer or reshaping one's understanding.
The author equates doubt with growth, suggesting it can add nuance to our beliefs or confirm them, much like the scientific method.
Not all doubt is beneficial; the article warns against the doubts of fools (questioning everything without discernment) and the doubts of the desperate (concerning matters like eternal salvation).
The most valuable form of doubt is that of thinkers, which is used purposefully to foster intellectual growth and should be embraced by free thinkers.

Doubting is good for you

My uncle is, by all definitions, a weird man.

In his very late 50s, he wears old denims, suspenders and one of those small round woolly hats that sailors often have.

He drives around the northern French countryside on the back of his motorbike, to visit people that could inspire Victor Hugo to write another Les Misérables.

To my knowledge, he’s the only lumberjack-physiotherapist to ever exist. Two careers he put together after giving up on a promising painter-sculptor one.

I am very attached to him. And not just because he’s also my godfather, despite having never found any actual use for religion.

But because he’s the real deal. It’s not for show. He’s not «un bobo parisien», like he likes to say.

He’s a genuine rural eccentric. And he thinks for himself.

Listening to him always sparks questions.

This week again, between a puff of smoke and a sip of local beer, he was philosophizing about the danger of our human tendency to form strict communities.

“The problem is our certainty” he said.

“A free thinker cannot afford to never have doubts”.

It’s a bit of an unconventional view of seeing things. In the post-positivism world, confidence is key, and doubting… Doubting makes you feel weak. Does it not?

I picture doubt as a poison. Because once you doubt something you knew to be true, you can doubt anything. Can’t you?

Doubting strips away trust. And that’s hardly ever healthy ground for anything. Is it not?

The more I think about it, the more the answers seems to blur. Ironically, because I allow myself to doubt.

But I’ve come to the realization that doubting is actually good for you.

You can have confidence and doubts.

My first breakthrough came when I realized that doubting and confidence aren’t opposite.

You can have both doubts and confidence. Because confidence happens at a much deeper level. It almost has to do with your identity.

My uncle, for example, is quite a confident man. He trusts his ability to think and to speak, and he’s not afraid to say something foolish. He can always change his mind. That’s his confidence.

But at the same time, he allows himself to doubt whatever it is he might believe. And that’s key.

Doubting shouldn’t be constant.

In French, we have an expression that is ‘remettre en doute’. The closest English translation would be ‘to put into question again’.

It’s when you believe something, and something else comes along that might prove you wrong. And so you test your belief against that new element. You “put into doubt again”.

You are not doubting everything. You are doubting a single piece.

But not only that, you are questioning it, rather than doubting it. It’s a test. There is an end to the doubt. You are looking for an answer.

That actually sound healthy, doesn’t it?

Doubting, in this sense, is a synonym of growing.

It could even replace curiosity.

Knowing something. Yet, being aware of signs that might contradict what we believe. Thinking. And deciding on a new belief. Shaping our understanding of the world, one doubt at a time.

It’s the logic of the scientific method.

Each doubt might not yield a change. It might confirm our belief. Or it might add subtlety to it.

If that’s not growing, I don’t know what is.

But not all doubts are useful.

In medieval times, a French thinker called Pierre Bersuire (in this Dictionarii seu Repertorii moralis Petri Berchorii Pictaviensis) divided doubts into three categories:

The doubts of the fools, who question everything and anything
The doubts of the desperate, who are doubting “eternal salvation”
The doubts of the thinkers, who need doubt to argument

I want to be a champion for trust. Because I believe trust and hope to be the most essential elements to our collective well-being. So I’m arguing against the doubts of the fools.

Doubting has to be specific to be useful. If not, we risk aimlessly going in circles, never finding any thread of concrete belief on which to stand. We have to believe something.

I have no inclination to tell you what to believe in terms of spirituality. So I’m not arguing in favor of religious doubt. But I can understand the futility to question something that cannot be proven.

So really, the only useful doubt is the doubt of the thinkers. The one doubt we can rely on for growth. The one that my uncle was referring to when he said that :

A free thinker cannot afford to never have doubts.