Let's discuss this thing called "FAITH!"

faith
Earlier today I was mentioning to some friends that I distinguish between faith and belief. I don't see "faith" (and this is a purely personal definitional choice on my part, not something I want to proselytize) as an acquiescence to a belief. I define "faith" as an attitude, a feeling that at the cosmic (religious?) level all is as it should be; it's a big, a VERY BIG, O.K. . Indeed, this feeling that, ultimately, all is well, that the universe does not need fixing, that my very mortality is right, frees me from the drive to find a belief that makes me feel good, even though it defies experience. Faith is, in this respect, not a pleasant belief; it's a comforting attiltude. The facts can deny beliefs, but they cannot repudiate an attitude. How does one attain such an attitude? That's what TRUE religion is about. Not fairytales

Good discussion.

In the religious context, I think "faith" is simply blind acceptance. I know that comment comes across as an insult to many theists, but it is not meant as an insult -- it is merely a statement of how I perceive faith in the religious context.

Here are a couple of specific statements that I've heard from various theists:

I have faith that there is a God.

I have faith that the Bible tells me what God is like -- and what God expects of humans.

Now I ask you:

What differentiates that kind of faith -- from blind acceptance?

My Faith is not so narrow as for it to be blind. I am human, I am fallible. If I don't question, how can I know that the other side didn't sneak one in. If one does not question, then the only faith one has is in him/herself. Therefore, raising thine ownself into "GOD" status!

I wish that a few in high places would only come to realize this. Then we could truly have peace!

author unknown

Faith, to me, is something one can only come to through living; something that is based on deep observation and thoughtful analysis. It is a culmination of what you find in life that holds spiritual meaning and truth and it encompasses all that is beautiful and unknowable.

A child has blind faith, but if one is a thinking, questioning adult, I find it difficult to understand how he or she could have blind faith.

I found two quotes from Schrodinger and Einstein:


``Toward the end of Schrodinger's career he made this statement, "I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us." Schrodinger believed that science has limits; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity.''

Some of Einstein's Writings on Science and Religion
``I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.''

I suspect the perception of insult is based on the terminology. "Blind acceptance" implies that the faith-holder hasn't considered other possibilities and that people who consider themselves to have "faith" are simply following what has been told to them without any critical thought of their own. While there may be some people who accept religious tenents without question I'd guess that the number is actually pretty small.



As stated, "blind acceptance" implies no consideration or thought on the part of the person. If the person HAS considered the alternatives then it isn't "blind acceptance". They are aware of competing thought and they made a choice based on their knowledge which would make it more of an "educated guess" (I won't get into how educated but..) then "blind acceptance".

faith
We cannot base religion on the notion of faith as belief. If we could, then you could not deny that I have religion when I say that "I have faith that there is no such thing as a God."

JLN, I've heard that point debated before, and both sides have merit!

given that i am an atheist, the very idea of "faith" is a-rational, one cannot arrive at a "faith" by means of thoughtful consideration anymore than one can have "faith" in gnomes or santa claus. Faith exists outside of rational consideration. I would assume that one could "chose" to have faith rather than "consider" to have faith. Just as one could "chose" to avoid black cats crossing their path.

So you have no faith that the sun will rise tomorrow?

Is there no rational, considered reason to believe that it will?

faith
Fisihin. The faith in the rise of the sun tomorrow is an assumption based on experience; it is therefore a rational, or reasonable, belief. But I don't think "faith" (i.e., belief) in the existence of a god, is at all reasonable in this sense since it is not based on ANY experience. This is why theologians always base their arguments for the existence of god on DEDUCTION from assumed principles. They do not derive their conclusions INDUCTIVELY from experience.

experiential evidence is not rooted in faith. I have zero faith that the sun will rise on the morror because evidence tells me the earth will rotate into the light of the sun.

At least, a lot of hope! That 21,000 pound bomb may hit the mother of all faults - then, well - Goodnight all!!

Re: faith


"Experience" only lends itself to what HAS happened. I could say that the sun rose today because it always has and there was no difference from the norm in any light or heat levels worlwide. Experience allows me to conclude that the sun did in fact rise base don that evidence even if I didn't see the sun myself.

That however, is not an indicator of what may or may not happen tomorrow. The sun COULD go supernova just as easily as it could remain in it's current position. The idea that the sun won't do that and that it will rise as always is nothing more than "faith".

faith
Dyslexia, you are obviously right, but you know what we mean.
Fishin'You say that because the sun has always risen in the past, that is no "indicator" of what it will do tomorrow. I beg to vary from that position. It is a strong indicator of what will PROBABLY happen tomorrow (unless, of course, we have evidence that it is beginning to nova). What has happened in the past is not PROOF of what will, with formal certainty, happen tomorrow. But the experience of the past in this case warrants "belief" (i.e., what most people call faith) that the sun will rise tomorrow. But this is a justifiable faith (based on experience) that is not justified in claims for the existence of a god-like phenomenon. The Aztec priests used to tell their subjects that the Sun rises each day because they, the priests, ENABLE it to do so by the ceremonial blowing of their conch (sp?) "horns," thus legitimizing their power and authority. There, the "faith" was not in the natural regularity of the sun but in the supernatural powers of the priests.

if one has reason, one does not need faith. if one has no reason, faith is what is necessary for the mental deceptions of belief in things that can not be proved. faith is a crutch that allows one to hobble about in a world dominated by sensory perception and experience.

when religionists profess 'faith' they are admitting their own stunted limitations of reasoning or are fleeing from reason by a complete fear of what rational logic produces.

in case no one is keeping up on current events, this stuff was beaten near to death in the 14th and 15th centuries by the scholasticists and nominalists. ockum kicked aquinas' ass, and the world has not been the same since, nor has faith.............believe it.

Re: faith


But it IS a faith. Whether any faith is justifiable or not is an entirely different question and is open to each individual's interpretation.

faith
Good points, Kuvasz and Fishin'. I'm just saying that if there is such a thing as valid faith there is also such a thing as invalid faith, at least from the perspective of logical thought. But remember that I prefer my "secular" concept of faith as a deep feeling/intuition of the essentially OKness of ultimate reality. Just an attitude, not a defensible belief.

"INVALID FAITH" well put JLN - hmmmmmmmm!

faith
Thank you, BillW. I'm just trying to be a subtle as you.