Blind Faith Or Following Truth?

@cut2thepoint,

For me, what makes sense is inclining towards a "worst-case-scenario" reality.
Most people just blindly assume that suffering ends effortlessly at death, but that's nothing more than a trivial un-examined conceptual assumption. Even without any evidence whatsoever the most intelligent way to live is to try to guarantee protection from future suffering by preparing for an infinite afterlife whose quality is determined by your own actions [has nothing to do with god though]

Consider this argument:

-there exists real (non-trivial) evidence for rebirth [even though it's not 100% certain, it can't be ignored or dismissed either] such as near-death experiences & child past life memories (which are rigoriously verified)

-if rebirth is false, then nothing you do matters [the highest saint & the worst criminal are equalized at the nothingness of death] with respect to your "situation" or "position" after death

-if rebirth is true, then it's absolutely essential to seek protection from future life suffering & this immediately takes precedence over all other matters. if hell really does exist, then every single minute of your life should be spent living in an 'optimal' fasion so as to guarantee that you won't go to hell.

So in either case you can't go wrong by living a life of strict moral discipline & virtue, whereas NOT living moral discipline/virtue _might_ [in a very real sense, not just arbitrary speculation; due to the scientific evidence of rebirth] cost you a lot [future suffering]

2 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

cut2thepoint wrote:

But why are humans so keen to believe first, or to "have faith" and not question if the path they have chosen, is really the work of god, gods, or even the devil or a devil?

Faith is the dafault option, the one that a new born baby arrives with and is thus obliged to depend upon.

The "questioning" then eventually arrives as a part of the look after yourself conditioned reaction to the continuing hardship of life.

The extent to which one is prone to question thus tends to depend on the educational background, in the broadest sense of the word, especially in terms of the sense of personal security.

The God the Father version of Christianity, for instance, was never going to appeal to somebody like me, who learned early on that fathers were definitley not to be trusted.

I have no problem at all with the Christian Faith of JS Bach, as expressed by rhythm and harmony; that's fine perfectly comprehensible as such, but as expressed in logical terms it does my head in, that so many would subscribe so enthusiastically to such a ***** **** of ****.

--- RH.

0 Replies

@non existence,

non_existence wrote:

For me, what makes sense is inclining towards a "worst-case-scenario" reality.
Most people just blindly assume that suffering ends effortlessly at death, but that's nothing more than a trivial un-examined conceptual assumption. Even without any evidence whatsoever the most intelligent way to live is to try to guarantee protection from future suffering by preparing for an infinite afterlife whose quality is determined by your own actions [has nothing to do with god though]....

While I have had much to argue about with the present institution of Buddhism, this continues to appeal to me above all else, the clarity of the purpose; the bottom up approach that begins with a comprehensible purpose in order for all else to follow from it, to proceed accordingly.

So much more sensible, I have always thought, than the usual, to be obsessively busy to proceed but only as if to flee more effectively from the awful question of why and what for.

--- RH.

1 Reply

@perplexity,

Ill just make a quick post otherwise Ill ramble on and it...{door slames}

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

cut2thepoint, when fact and truth are equally inaccessible, there is nothing left but to procede on faith. Don Juan Matus, the Yaqui Brujo of Carlos Castaneda's books says that the warrior must believe because it is his "innermost predilection" to believe. (What a wonderful phrase!) I understand that passage. It is simply my "innermost predilection" to believe rather than not believe. If you are still around, I hope this will speak to you.

Samm

1 Reply

@SammDickens,

Samm;124554 wrote:

cut2thepoint, when fact and truth are equally inaccessible, there is nothing left but to procede on faith. Don Juan Matus, the Yaqui Brujo of Carlos Castaneda's books says that the warrior must believe because it is his "innermost predilection" to believe. (What a wonderful phrase!) I understand that passage. It is simply my "innermost predilection" to believe rather than not believe. If you are still around, I hope this will speak to you.

Samm

Faith and truth are not opposed, since what is believed on blind faith might be true. It is just that there is no reason to think that what is believed on "blinc faith" is true. If, on "blind faith" I believe that Whirlagig will win the first race, that may turn out to be true. Whirlagig may win. But I had no reason to think Whirlagig would win.

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

Why would anyone follow "Truth" unless they had "Faith" in (the value of ) "Truth"?

Refried or reified, "Truth" is a big blank blur. More specifics please. Jesus called himself the Truth and these days the Truth calls itself Jesus New and Improved.

1 Reply

@non existence,

non_existence;1251 wrote:

For me, what makes sense is inclining towards a "worst-case-scenario" reality.

I sense pascals wager coming...

non_existence;1251 wrote:

Most people just blindly assume that suffering ends effortlessly at death, but that's nothing more than a trivial un-examined conceptual assumption.

Yeah, the Buddha was asked about this but refused to answer it. Probably because it refers to a self which he already taught to be an illusion so if the self is not a substantial thing, talking about future existence is meaningless. I tend to agree with this assumption even though it is arguable.

non_existence;1251 wrote:

Even without any evidence whatsoever the most intelligent way to live is to try to guarantee protection from future suffering by preparing for an infinite afterlife whose quality is determined by your own actions [has nothing to do with god though]

Something would have to set the rule though. Why would an action dictate a result? How is it determined? The result would have to be determined by something and is that something consistent? Are there any times when someone deserving of a result actually slips through the cracks and doesn't get the result they deserved? I just don't see how such actions could influence future results. For example, some people prosper from lying or deceiving people, they never seem to really meet any sort of justice from it. Politicians have perfected this and they prosper from it. So if this sort of future result is consistent why doesn't it work now?

non_existence;1251 wrote:

Consider this argument:

-if rebirth is true, then it's absolutely essential to seek protection from future life suffering & this immediately takes precedence over all other matters. if hell really does exist, then every single minute of your life should be spent living in an 'optimal' fasion so as to guarantee that you won't go to hell.

Not necessarily. It would mean hell is not permanent so therefore why should you care what your future result is? Sure you might have to suffer but you know it won't be for ever. Besides you don't even know really what you should or should not be doing anyways. How is everything weighted? Most of the time morals are just guesses or the group closest to you uses a majority favor but it is seldom universally accepted moral or ethic. If that is the case how can you be certain that, for instance that lying is negative? Maybe it is actually positive? We just don't like it but maybe in the universal causality matrix, lying is not negative. Or maybe even murder is not negative?

non_existence;1251 wrote:

So in either case you can't go wrong by living a life of strict moral discipline & virtue, whereas NOT living moral discipline/virtue _might_ [in a very real sense, not just arbitrary speculation; due to the scientific evidence of rebirth] cost you a lot [future suffering]

Yeah that sounds good but you have not defined what moral discipline or virtue really means. Sure I have heard, this or that, but there is NEVER consistency. Some will even make the claim that murder is wrong but in the very next sentence, war is justifiable murder. How can that be?

If you can not pin down exactly what is moral and virtue then chances are they don't actually exist at all other than what we WANT them to be subjectively.

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

Faith is absolutely vital to life, IMO. It's been said that Without it, there can be no victory and I tend to agree. Faith in some ways goes right along with the whole "power of positive thinking" notion, in terms of, having faith in something effects our lives in very profound ways and in more prevalent ways than we probably think.

we all have faith in ourselves, in our friends, our family. Faith gives us the confidence to take chances and to trust people. Faith can give us a peace of mind and in fact, helps us get through the day more efficiently. Team sports, and for the sake of my example, Football, is in someways a microcosm for life itself. Each player has a role to play and a job to do. If one player tries to do someone else's job, he tends to get caught. So through practices and time spent together, each player has to have faith that his teammates will do their job.

Faith, at least not all faith, is not usually blind(and just as a matter of fact I don't really like the term blind faith because in my opinion most faith isn't totally blind) & it most certainly is not a bad thing. If someone asked me to do something I've never done before, upon accepting it, I would have faith in myself to do it based possibly on things I've done in the past that were similar or just on visualization of the problem or dozens of other reasons.

I don't believe that my faith in God is wrong or blind in that respect, because I feel like there are enough tangential issues, experiences, and evidences to assert that that God is real or that such a believe in not totally blind. It it a much smaller leap than some here would have us believe. In some ways it may actually take a larger leap(or at least as large) of faith to assert the opposite

3 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

cut2thepoint;1248 wrote:

With so many religions in the world all claiming to know the truth, is it the case that many are living what can only can be described as blind faith? Even jesus said just believe. I do not doubt that many people in this world have had religious experiences that they can not explain , but does it make it a truth? I accept there is something about religion that can cause people to completly change thre lives for the better, or in some cases for worse.

But why are humans so keen to believe first, or to "have faith" and not question if the path they have chosen, is really the work of god, gods, or even the devil or a devil?

I see that life is beautifull in many ways but does all the answers come down to a mysterious figure looking down on us?
I expect I will hear testomonies of all kinds. If I do you have not understood my point, I do not deny they are real and precious to you but I am asking whether you are willing to believe anything.

0 Replies

@Amperage,

We are all afraid of what we cannot see.
No-one can see everything.
We all have a blind spot.
So accepting faith as your blind spot,
you are less afraid of the darkness,
that surrounds everything and you.
Some even see light at the end of their darkness.
With faith is at least trying to see more,
trying not to be scared of the blindness even welcoming it.

Imagine if you will that you are only as blind as the light you cannot imagine.
Faith then becomes only an imagining?
As much or as little as all any reality is imagined.

John Milton was blind but he still questioned and found more to imagine into reality. Some might say he found more because he could not see.

Willing to believe everything as long as it gives me visions even if the eyes still cant see past my nose.
Willing to believe anything as long as it gives me a truth no matter how singular and personal.

I am not sure i fall into this bracket of 'blind faith' as a good and strong faith needs to be questioned daily, by my view anyway.

Am i more or less blind than you for not seeing as much or less than you?
It could be possible that i see in the dark where you only see shadows, just as you may not even be afraid of the dark.
We each have our own illuminaries or blindfolds.
We only see as far as we can perceive believe.
I am no further or behind you because of what i believe and you dont, or what you perceive and i dont.
Each just trying not to be afriad of our own darknesses.
When will we all realise that darkness is just as dark for any or all of us.
Some are less afraid of it though.
Just as some welcome it.
Each ot their own.
Faith may be for some a way to less fear,
you wouldn't want to take that away from anyone would you?
you wouldn't want there to be fear where there need not be any?

0 Replies

@Amperage,

Amperage;125605 wrote:

Faith is absolutely vital to life, IMO. It's been said that Without it, there can be no victory and I tend to agree.

I agree, and its funny that atheists play the "faith is blind" card. Agnostics can get away with it, for they have faith in doubt. But the atheist who just knows there's no God is practicing their own sort of faith.

Faith is a dirty word lately. It's a cute little trend. We all have faith, it seems, in the wrongness and badness of faith. I wonder about those guys who take 3-pointers at the buzzer. Is faith the magic that makes nobodies somebodies?

For me, Jesus isn't supernatural, but his or his character's speech on faith remains impressive. Faith as a mustard seed. Faith can move mountains, for no one is going to start breaking rock until the job seems/feels possible in the first place.

How could we have significant intimate relationships without faith both in ourselves and our lover?

0 Replies

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;125591 wrote:

Why would anyone follow "Truth" unless they had "Faith" in (the value of ) "Truth"?

Right. Luckily, though, faith in truth is, by no means, blind faith. We have a lot of reason to have faith in truth.

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

Is there a man on this earth without faith? Is faith the name of our attachment to axioms?

Some assure us that Reason is their game. But what is Reason? A vague word, which inspires in them an emotion of reverence. Has Reason finished justifying itself? I think not. Is the "faculty" of Reason less superstitious than the immaterial soul? Perhaps not.
Faith is the latest sin. Authorities in lab coats (how like the robes of the priest!) have spoken.

0 Replies

@Amperage,

Amperage;125605 wrote:

Faith is absolutely vital to life, IMO.

Animals and I seem to fine without it. Oh wait, you really aren't talking about faith here are you? You are about to swap faith with another word.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

It's been said that Without it, there can be no victory and I tend to agree. Faith in some ways goes right along with the whole "power of positive thinking" notion, in terms of, having faith in something effects our lives in very profound ways and in more prevalent ways than we probably think.

Yeah I would call it trust. But trust also assumes things and it is an investment. Once that fails, what happens to the trust? It is gone. Does your faith act the same way? No because you never allow it to change regardless of what happens. Therefore what you are referring to is trust, not faith.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

we all have faith in ourselves, in our friends, our family.

Once again, you aren't talking about faith, you are referring to trust. That is earned, and reinforced or lost. What you are trying to do is justify your reasoning for faith. But you are butchering trust in the process.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

Faith gives us the confidence to take chances and to trust people.

See here you start to admit that you are substituting trust but faith is not trust. Why? Because you are not altering your faith accordingly like trust. I give everyone trust equally, but if that trust is violated then I do not trust in the same way. With your faith (religious), you do not do that, you always maintain it regardless of the reasoning.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

Faith can give us a peace of mind and in fact, helps us get through the day more efficiently. Team sports, and for the sake of my example, Football, is in someways a microcosm for life itself. Each player has a role to play and a job to do.

And again, this is trust. Relying on another player is making an assumption that they will do what their task or position dictates them to. You are trusting that they will follow through. But nothing says for certain that they will, trust allows this change to occur, your faith does not. So again faith and trust are not the same.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

Faith, at least not all faith, is not usually blind(and just as a matter of fact I don't really like the term blind faith because in my opinion most faith isn't totally blind) & it most certainly is not a bad thing.

Here is where you start to realize you are talking about trust and faith as being two different things. You are slightly acknowledging that there is a difference between religious faith and the so called faith in a person, you are trying to promote here.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

If someone asked me to do something I've never done before, upon accepting it, I would have faith in myself to do it based possibly on things I've done in the past that were similar or just on visualization of the problem or dozens of other reasons.

This is not faith either. It is trust in your ability because of your past success or failure or even understanding of what might be involved. This is not faith, well it is not comparative to religious faith which is baseless. You can't compare the two and you know this yet you are still trying to imply that they are the same. They are not.

Amperage;125605 wrote:

I don't believe that my faith in God is wrong or blind in that respect, because I feel like there are enough tangential issues, experiences, and evidences to assert that that God is real or that such a believe in not totally blind. It it a much smaller leap than some here would have us believe. In some ways it may actually take a larger leap(or at least as large) of faith to assert the opposite

Here is where you would like to argue that you have trust in the assertion that god exists, but you can't. Why? Because you really have nothing to base it on. You say you have tangential issues, experiences and evidence but they are subjective and not universal. Meaning, and using your own example above, a job.

If you learn a job, you can have confidence or trust in your ability to teach it to others to pass that trust onto them. With your example, with your experiences, your tangential issues, you can not pass them onto or teach others that god exists. This is where what you are talking about differs.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple,

First see 1CellofMany's post where he describes faith:

1CellOfMany;125647 wrote:

When one acts out of faith, and commits to ones actions, a time comes when the object of that faith is either confirmed or not. A non-religious example would be going to a party at the home of a friend of a friend of your cousin. Your cousin tells you that there will be lots of (whatever you are after) there, and you have faith in what your cousin says, so you commit to going to the party. At the party, your faith is either confirmed, or it is not.

I have faith in the power of prayer and meditation to help me to develop virtues and overcome my faults. I pray regularly, and find that on those days that I neglect to pray, not only am I more likely to get frustrated by things not going how they should, but more things happen to test my patience.

I agree with his assessment here. Next see Reconstructo's post:

Reconstructo;125669 wrote:

We all have faith, it seems, in the wrongness and badness of faith. I wonder about those guys who take 3-pointers at the buzzer. Is faith the magic that makes nobodies somebodies?

For me, Jesus isn't supernatural, but his or his character's speech on faith remains impressive. Faith as a mustard seed. Faith can move mountains, for no one is going to start breaking rock until the job seems/feels possible in the first place.

How could we have significant intimate relationships without faith both in ourselves and our lover?

Next examine the definitions of faith, trust, and belief from http://www.merriam-webster.com/:

Quote:

The only real difference between religious faith and all other faiths(or trust as you want to call it) that I can see is that one does not get a return on investment until one dies with the former. And even that I don't agree with, matter of fact I strongly disagree with what I said there. Strongly. Even if there is no afterlife, I feel I am getting a return on my investment in God on a daily basis that is immeasurable. So I take it back, I should not have even said that, it was completely wrong and not very well thought out, because I feel my life is continually enriched through my relationship with God.... so I see absolutely no fundamental difference whatsoever. One is trust in your friends and the other is trust in God. Perhaps one small difference is that faith needs less evidence vs what you are calling trust, however, faith still needs evidence and one does not have faith in something overtly false. At the same time though, faith implies trust and may in fact be a deeper form of trust.

If there is a difference please explain it to me

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

Faith is its own fulfillment and virtue its own reward?

We can think of faith as a state of equilibrium and doubt as a tipping. We move toward faith as we move toward dinner.

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

Doesn't "faith in God" mean two different things?

1. belief that God exists.
2. trust in God.

And 2 implies 1, but 1 does not imply 2. (1 is the more usual sense).

0 Replies

@cut2thepoint,

We wouldn't post unless we believed (had faith) in the worth of our thoughts. Isn't justified belief similar to laudable faith? Faith simply has certain negative connotations.

1 Reply

Blind Faith Or Following Truth?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know