Belief and unbelief and doubt are different in kind

... neurologically speaking, that is. Different parts of the brain are involved in each. However committing ourselves to beliefs, or not, does require and emotional engagement.

'What I find most interesting about our results is the suggestion that our view of the world must pass through a bottleneck in regions of the brain generally understood to govern emotion, reward and primal feelings like pain and disgust,' Harris said. 'While evaluating mathematical, ethical or factual statements requires very different kinds of processing, accepting or rejecting these statements seems to rely upon a more primitive process that may be content-neutral. I think that it has long been assumed that believing that two plus two equals four and believing that George Bush is President of the United States have almost nothing in common as cognitive operations. But what they clearly have in common is that both representations of the world satisfy some process of truth-testing that we continually perform. I think this is yet another result, in a long line of results, that calls the popular opposition between reason and emotion into question.'

That last statement is almost old-hat now. What we may want to put a question mark against is the 'representation' bit. Representation may not be an adequate model to work with neurologically speaking.
It does seem to underline why arguments about politics and religion are sometimes the most heated: they are about world view and have to pass through the more emotionally charged processing areas of the brain. The question is whether there are ways to make progress in these kinds of areas. Does knowing this help us in reconciliation, for example?
Different Areas Of The Brain Respond To Belief, Disbelief And Uncertainty: