Ought beliefs to be justified?

There are democrats, and there are republicans; there are theists, and there are atheists; there is x, and there is y; there are a lot of beliefs out there. Beliefs which many people believe, believe with conviction, beliefs that contradict one another, beliefs that only as an exception can replace other beliefs. Nearly all discourse between differing believers ends in no net change, both still believing the same thing, despite both people knowing that they're right and providing reasons for why that is so. Should people even try to justify their beliefs then? The ought to, but it only makes sense to do so for themselves.

To come back to the argument between those two believers, which one is right? Both can justify their beliefs and both can refute the justifications of the other's, rarely can one win such an argument. Even if one does win, most likely the other will not change their beliefs: they have just become tired of arguing. The reason neither can show the other the truth of their belief is due to their perspectives. Both have the true argument to themselves and see the falsity of the other's, but that is only due to the inclinations and other beliefs of that specific individual.

No arguments be made without some prerequisite beliefs. Calls to "human nature" or "common sense" or etc. all require belief in the verity of such things. And even if both people accept those beliefs they will have differing interpretations of those beliefs due to having varying levels of belief in the sub-beliefs within that belief. Arguments can only succeed when presented to people with similar beliefs, in which cases it is less of a conversion and more of a discussion.

People only accept beliefs when such a belief does not contradict their other beliefs, at least not to an extent that they notice nor care about¹. In such a case, rarely do people care for the justification, they see the idea and unconsciously channel it through their own justifications and contradictions, and if it sticks it sticks. A justification only makes a belief easier to swallow, to consciously accept as a new belief. Justifying your beliefs to others (yes I realize I'm doing that right now) is pointless since the justification that matters is the one they come up with themselves. They need the belief to be true specifically to them, with all their other beliefs and such, and your attempts at proving will do little.

Despite this, there is still merit in justifying beliefs. There is merit in that expounding them will benefit yourself. It will help you make sure that your beliefs are not just true to your unconscious but also true to yourself, your conscious self, what you are right now and what you ought to value more of than the rest of your brain. By bringing the unconscious justifications to the conscious and examining them one can verify that the justifications are true under their conscious beliefs and values, not under the stowaway beliefs which we consciously reject but yet still manage to stay due to an influential environment. By justifying your beliefs you make them in close accordance to your identity rather than to your unconscious.


[1] Thought and belief