Illogical world

[The Herald of War]

Suicidesoldier#1

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

Quote:

Um... the definition of faith is irrelevant to this,

Haha, yeah, sure, whatever. Ignore what I first commented on.

Ignore the rest of my comment. emo

But the definition of faith is a matter of semantics, with a variety of different definitions for it, so it's kind of more or less irrelevant what the exact definition is, which was the original point of my post.

If you're gonna divert then don't expect the courtesy of having it all replied to.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

Quote:

Um... the definition of faith is irrelevant to this,

Haha, yeah, sure, whatever. Ignore what I first commented on.

Ignore the rest of my comment. emo

But the definition of faith is a matter of semantics, with a variety of different definitions for it, so it's kind of more or less irrelevant what the exact definition is, which was the original point of my post.

If you're gonna divert then don't expect the courtesy of having it all replied to.

I still carried on with the rest of the post, that was just a preface to say it wasn't important.

[anonymous attributes]

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

The Herald of War

Suicidesoldier#1

Divine_Malevolence

"faith
fāTH/Submit
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something."

No.
No it isn't.

That is but one definition of faith. xp

My particular definition is based more so on "belief that is not based on proof".

Dictionary!

I mean it's almost never used that way in common vernacular.

A leap of faith isn't a leap made of absolute trust that you will succeed, it inherently implies the idea of doubt and potential loss but going with it anyways.

Virtually all forms of the word faith used by normal people don't imply absolute trust or confidence, no more than words like "hope" or "wish", so, that's a rather uncommon definition.

But you can have evidence. Not absolute proof, but that doesn't mean the belief isn't based on proof at all.

Evidence which is equally to any other evidence, including nothing.

Justify that it's equal to nothing.

Quote:

It can seem reasonable, but what is reasonable is based on our perceptions which are equally relative and easily distorted. Not to say we should be dismissive of evidence, but it's still clearly in many situations not concrete.

And yet it is still evidence. Thereby meaning the definition doesn't apply.

Quote:

The evidence might just be wrong or there may some flaw we glossed over initially with it; believing it to be true is the problem, less so the issue of whether or not that evidence is even valid. Even if we ignore the over-all idea of being in the matrix or a dream or what have you.

I don't see anything in the definition of faith that says 'And no evidence can ever be right'.

its not that the evidence can't be right, its that the fact remains, you still have some amount of faith in order to believe that the evidence you do have is actually the truth of the matter.

I don't think Soldier (I could be wrong) is scobbling over how much faith, or what kind (As some argue there are different kinds) I understand that the fact remains, there is something unseen, and there is faith put in that unseeness when it is considered truth when it is ultimately uncertain, whether there are awesome theories or not doesn't change it.

[anonymous attributes]

All my contestants have left..

[LeLoupDesSteppes]

anonymous attributes

If morality is subjective then by definition, you cannot trust governments, nor scientists/evolution, nor you, or me without having faith in that thing or person unless you have looked under the microscope yourself.

It is illogical then for those ones to teach that faith is only with the religious ones.

arrow Morality is subjective, yes. Such concepts are. Right and wrong are subjective. But you can see that some things are correct, and some aren't. Because of something called a conscience.

arrow I can trust scientists and evolution and have 'faith' in them because the amount of evidence and research is extensive. There are literal centuries and piles upon piles upon piles of evidence.
I don't need to look under the microscope myself--there are people better qualified than I who have taken the time to look, and record their findings and travelled the world, and are even out in space. Proof for evolution and for a naturalist worldview is more than convincing. It simply cannot be denied.

arrow So, there is a difference between the quasi servile faith of the religious and the critical trust of those of us who ascribe to a scientific worldview.

arrow I cannot trust governments because they are corrupt. They do not have our best interests in mind. They are led by the lowest of the low. By the most duplicitous, dirty douchebags.

arrow The kind of 'faith' that science teaches is one you can test for yourself----not one you have to simply follow without any thought.

[stealthmongoose]

Truths acquired on the basis of evidence and reason inform moral and ethical action to greater degrees than deception and self-delusion ever could.

To that end, our species has evolved to acquire as much information as possible to make the decisions we make. We use tools and our environment to do this and it has aided us in many ways.

[anonymous attributes]

stealthmongoose

Truths acquired on the basis of evidence and reason inform moral and ethical action to greater degrees than deception and self-delusion ever could.

To that end, our species has evolved to acquire as much information as possible to make the decisions we make. We use tools and our environment to do this and it has aided us in many ways.

I just read your sig "The Fool sayeth in his heart, there is no Santa Claus" Which is a mock to the Scriptures which which reads, "The fool sayeth in his heart, there is no God."


Do you know why the scriptures say that? I ask on point of debate.

[stealthmongoose]

anonymous attributes

stealthmongoose

Truths acquired on the basis of evidence and reason inform moral and ethical action to greater degrees than deception and self-delusion ever could.

To that end, our species has evolved to acquire as much information as possible to make the decisions we make. We use tools and our environment to do this and it has aided us in many ways.

I just read your sig "The Fool sayeth in his heart, there is no Santa Claus" Which is a mock to the Scriptures which which reads, "The fool sayeth in his heart, there is no God."


Do you know why the scriptures say that? I ask on point of debate.

Before I answer a potentially loaded question, I will ask for it's relevance?

[anonymous attributes]

stealthmongoose

anonymous attributes

stealthmongoose

Truths acquired on the basis of evidence and reason inform moral and ethical action to greater degrees than deception and self-delusion ever could.

To that end, our species has evolved to acquire as much information as possible to make the decisions we make. We use tools and our environment to do this and it has aided us in many ways.

I just read your sig "The Fool sayeth in his heart, there is no Santa Claus" Which is a mock to the Scriptures which which reads, "The fool sayeth in his heart, there is no God."


Do you know why the scriptures say that? I ask on point of debate.

Before I answer a potentially loaded question, I will ask for it's relevance?

For the very reason I have assured you, it is on point of debate, the very tip and head.

[Inritus_v3]

Of course faith isn't only for religious people.

[Blood Valkyrie]

Evolution isn't morality. You can't say that it's subjective without sounding like you don't look at dictionaries.

[toasega]

[anonymous attributes]

Blood Valkyrie

Evolution isn't morality. You can't say that it's subjective without sounding like you don't look at dictionaries.

Prove that morality is not subjective.

[anonymous attributes]

toasega

Matrix, system failure.

[Blood Valkyrie]

anonymous attributes

Blood Valkyrie

Evolution isn't morality. You can't say that it's subjective without sounding like you don't look at dictionaries.

Prove that morality is not subjective.

The issue is whether morality is equivalent to evolution, and it is not. Since evolution is not morality, you cannot say that evolution is subjective like morality can be.