|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:44 pm
Maze1125 I feel all faiths are stupid. To have faith in something, it to be certain of something with no or very little evidence, something thing that can't be proved. How is that an inteligent thing to do?
Smoovegeek, I agree with you. Conservative Judaism is one of the more reasonable religions I know. I guess you could say we're Unitarians who believe we have a covenant with God (the Torah).
By the way, Unitarian Universalism is one of the other religions I like. Basically, Universalist Unitarians believe that there is a God and that one should find his or her own path to God. They don't believe that unbaptized people will go to Hell; in fact, they aren't even Christian. UU is more of an amalgamation of the ethical teachings of a lot of religions.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:10 am
My personal opinion (which I realize has been said by others) is that faith leads (in some) to being a stronger adhesive to your idea, because even though logic seems so solid, its really very easy to disregard. To prove something to something else, yes, its better and would win an argument, but faith passes (with flying colors) the test of time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:18 pm
Maze1125 I feel all faiths are stupid. To have faith in something, it to be certain of something with no or very little evidence, something thing that can't be proved. How is that an inteligent thing to do? But what else is there to believe in? I think it would be a comfort to have faith, to truly believe that what one does is for a purpose, is not futility in the face of the infinite. John Blackthorne By the way, Unitarian Universalism is one of the other religions I like. Basically, Universalist Unitarians believe that there is a God and that one should find his or her own path to God. They don't believe that unbaptized people will go to Hell; in fact, they aren't even Christian. UU is more of an amalgamation of the ethical teachings of a lot of religions. Unitarians supposedly don't believe in God at all, but in a life force of some kind that means many things to different people. Thus the main hymn, Spirit of Life. (I'm technically Unitarian Universalist, though I don't go to church anymore) Unfortunately, though the idea is sound, the religion itself is composed of the lost and wandering that don't want to be found. When I say 'found,' I don't mean by God. But a church going religion composed of all religions is insecure and produces very strange people indeed. Mostly it's made up of people who just want to believe in something, for the above stated reasons. (Or at least my church was) airsswordsman My personal opinion (which I realize has been said by others) is that faith leads (in some) to being a stronger adhesive to your idea, because even though logic seems so solid, its really very easy to disregard. To prove something to something else, yes, its better and would win an argument, but faith passes (with flying colors) the test of time. I think that is because logic is cold and gives no comfort. Faith is something nebulous, and there for reasuring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:46 pm
DistortedDark Logic sould p;rove faith, it doesn't have to prove it completly. Good examples are Afterlife and Genisis. There's some good evidence for an afterlife but nothing completly solid. There's alot of agrences betwen Geneisis and known theories but just because it says the world was created in seven days and humans were the first animals people take up arms. What? I must have missed the parts of Genesis that accord with scientific theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:22 am
As powerful as faith can be, I still hold that reason is going to be the ulitimate victor. We live in a world of information and cold hard facts. People may find faith reassuring, but most people fall to faith as a means of dealing with facts that may be unpleasant to think about. I don't mean to discredit religion or faith, but to a point, faith and religion are a means of coping with rather difficult emotions and realizations.
For example, we all die. Death as a concept bothers most people so they try to find a way to console themselves. There must be life after death. Then people feel better about dying because the believe there is something to go on to. That is an oversimplification, but the point remains the same. Rational thought and logic gives people solid ground to stand on when they are experiancing something or discussing something. Logic provides a foundation for a concrete understanding of things. It avoids the vauge and the unclear, which is just as powerful and just as comforting as faith can be simply because logic gives people control over their enviornment. Knowledge is power and the knowledge of life's mysteries can either be credited to faith or explained with reason. Most people will side with reason because it is a clear path that can be followed, revisted, and it is easy to lead other people down. Faith is a winding path with many twists and turns as well as many more paths leading off of it and many people trying to tell you what is right and wrong, which path to take. Faith has become so controversial and uncertain that it is shakey at best. Logic however, rarely fails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:47 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:40 pm
Aesh As powerful as faith can be, I still hold that reason is going to be the ulitimate victor. We live in a world of information and cold hard facts. People may find faith reassuring, but most people fall to faith as a means of dealing with facts that may be unpleasant to think about. I don't mean to discredit religion or faith, but to a point, faith and religion are a means of coping with rather difficult emotions and realizations. For example, we all die. Death as a concept bothers most people so they try to find a way to console themselves. There must be life after death. Then people feel better about dying because the believe there is something to go on to. That is an oversimplification, but the point remains the same. Rational thought and logic gives people solid ground to stand on when they are experiancing something or discussing something. Logic provides a foundation for a concrete understanding of things. It avoids the vauge and the unclear, which is just as powerful and just as comforting as faith can be simply because logic gives people control over their enviornment. Knowledge is power and the knowledge of life's mysteries can either be credited to faith or explained with reason. Most people will side with reason because it is a clear path that can be followed, revisted, and it is easy to lead other people down. Faith is a winding path with many twists and turns as well as many more paths leading off of it and many people trying to tell you what is right and wrong, which path to take. Faith has become so controversial and uncertain that it is shakey at best. Logic however, rarely fails. I do agree that reason is, or should be, the ultimate victor. However, the idea of life after death as a consolation I do not entirely agree with. It is true that believing in a life after death is a comfort, but that's not necessarily what the idea was created for. Who has not felt the radiance of a glorious death of self sacrifice, even if they have not witnessed it themselves? Who has not felt or, known someone who has felt, what they believe to be the spirit of a loved one? It's just a feeling, I know, but I feel that the life force of the human mind does go on, though to what I don't know. It just seems to me that the human spirit is stronger than the human body. Granted, I'm an idealist; however, it seems that faith was created because people felt it was right, as well as a comfort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:52 pm
Well, I'll give you the point as far as it was an oversimplification on my part. I believe it was Fredrich Neitchze (spelling?) who said "religion is the opiate of the masses." I think that faith is a very powerful thing. I believe that people will die for faith. I do not believe that faith can win over reason. Religion is not a simple condolance, but it does give people a very handy way to justify their actions both to themselves and to the society.
Take Christians for example, and do not choose them for any vindictive reason, they are simply best understood I think. They subscribe to the idea of forgiveness. They believe that they possess salvation because Jesus died for their sins. The long and short of it is that they have a 'get out of jail free' card. Any transgressions they are guilty of are supposedly washed away and forgiven. Even after they are 'saved' they are still able to turn around and pray to God for forgiveness and they are, once again, free of the burden of sin. To me, this comes across as a condolence for acts the Christians feel guilty about. If they feel bad about it, relief is simply a prayer away. This seems like a nifty way to shift responsibility for acts commited away from those guilty of them. In their mind they can rationalize, "it's okay, Jesus forgives me."
I think faith was created because people don't like the unknown. Humans simply don't handle mysteries well. It gnaws at the back of their minds and consumes their thoughts, eventually breeding fear and possibly hatred. Religion is a nice and handy way to explain that which they can not explain. Religion took root much earlier on, before humans were even capable of learning about the world around them in a scientific sense. When primeval man saw lightning strike a tree and give birth to fire, he could not begin to grasp the physics of it. To him, it was power plain and simple. They couldn't explain it and it scared them. Thus lightning became a god. Worship it and it becomes something familiar. A god is something man can grasp, but an unknown power...that terrifies him.
Religion just doesn't have the credentials to warrant its use as an argumentitive tool. Over the centuries it has been used as a weapon against opposing religions, a method of controlling the populace, an excuse for cruel liberties against foreign people, and a sedative for social and political turmoil. Faith is too easy to manipulate because it is so subjective. Logic and reason can still be manipulated, but they are far less subjective. You can only see a fact in a limited number of ways. What goes up will come down. Fact. I will go to heaven when I die. Faith. I can prove the former. Nothing can be said about the latter because there are too many different ideas of just what qualifies one for heaven, hell, purgatory, reincarnation, nirvana, or whatever each facet and denomiation of religion choose to call it. Logic follows a clear-cut path. Faith meanders down a multitude of slippery, ill-mapped, narrow, and far less stable paths. It simply doesn't have enough strength to argue with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:45 pm
Aesh Well, I'll give you the point as far as it was an oversimplification on my part. I believe it was Fredrich Neitchze (spelling?) who said "religion is the opiate of the masses." I think that faith is a very powerful thing. I believe that people will die for faith. I do not believe that faith can win over reason. Religion is not a simple condolance, but it does give people a very handy way to justify their actions both to themselves and to the society. Take Christians for example, and do not choose them for any vindictive reason, they are simply best understood I think. They subscribe to the idea of forgiveness. They believe that they possess salvation because Jesus died for their sins. The long and short of it is that they have a 'get out of jail free' card. Any transgressions they are guilty of are supposedly washed away and forgiven. Even after they are 'saved' they are still able to turn around and pray to God for forgiveness and they are, once again, free of the burden of sin. To me, this comes across as a condolence for acts the Christians feel guilty about. If they feel bad about it, relief is simply a prayer away. This seems like a nifty way to shift responsibility for acts commited away from those guilty of them. In their mind they can rationalize, "it's okay, Jesus forgives me." I think faith was created because people don't like the unknown. Humans simply don't handle mysteries well. It gnaws at the back of their minds and consumes their thoughts, eventually breeding fear and possibly hatred. Religion is a nice and handy way to explain that which they can not explain. Religion took root much earlier on, before humans were even capable of learning about the world around them in a scientific sense. When primeval man saw lightning strike a tree and give birth to fire, he could not begin to grasp the physics of it. To him, it was power plain and simple. They couldn't explain it and it scared them. Thus lightning became a god. Worship it and it becomes something familiar. A god is something man can grasp, but an unknown power...that terrifies him. Religion just doesn't have the credentials to warrant its use as an argumentitive tool. Over the centuries it has been used as a weapon against opposing religions, a method of controlling the populace, an excuse for cruel liberties against foreign people, and a sedative for social and political turmoil. Faith is too easy to manipulate because it is so subjective. Logic and reason can still be manipulated, but they are far less subjective. You can only see a fact in a limited number of ways. What goes up will come down. Fact. I will go to heaven when I die. Faith. I can prove the former. Nothing can be said about the latter because there are too many different ideas of just what qualifies one for heaven, hell, purgatory, reincarnation, nirvana, or whatever each facet and denomiation of religion choose to call it. Logic follows a clear-cut path. Faith meanders down a multitude of slippery, ill-mapped, narrow, and far less stable paths. It simply doesn't have enough strength to argue with. I do agree with you on every count, actually. Religion is too easily corrupted, people feel that they have special rights because they are a certain religion, that 'get out of jail free card' that you mentioned. It condoles them and is too often used as a substitute for reason. Religion is an attempt to illuminate the darkness of mystery. But I do think that perhaps it is something a little more, if you see what I mean. For example, if you go back far enough, we speculate that the universe came into existence with a bang. Fair enough. But what happened to instigate that bang? If nothing existed before, then what happened? And that is the credence that I give religion. Something had to have caused these things to happen. A god seems as good an explanation as any. (Again, I'm an idealist. I look at facts, and then I tint them rose colored for my satisfaction. 3nodding )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:12 pm
But then you have the problem of infinite regression. If God caused the Big Bang, what caused God? If X caused God, what caused X? If Y caused X, what caused Y, and so on ad infinitum.
You could argue that science can only fall into the trap of infinite regression too, but ultimately I think both religious people and scientists have to posit that something has existed forever. Christians would call this God. Most scientists would say we don't know, or we don't know yet, but some people have offered the oscillating universe theory -- that the universe has been around forever, expanding and contracting in one Big Bang (and "Big Crunch") after another.
Of course, there are problems with this theory, but humor me for a second. We don't know what happens to stuff that is captured by a black hole. What if black holes are all connected to a single point that, once all the matter in the universe has been collected there, reaches critical mass and explodes again?
Sounds pretty crazy, huh? Unfounded?
So's the existence of God. Theists have to go one step further into the unfounded, though: they have to assign their eternal existent a consciousness, a personality, and the ability to contradict the laws of nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:21 pm
True. Although I do like your theory. Again, I am not religious, and inetellectually I know that religion is shaky at best; in this day and age it may even simply persist as a tradition, and because it is a convenient way to delegate responsibility.
And then of course, there is the idea that it's just easier. The human mind tends to shut down if it comprehends infinity for a moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 10:11 pm
Hmm, faith verses reason. I see some of you talking about logic. I'm not sure I would say that they are exactly the same. Anyway, I will say that I think that faith comes from reason itself. Like the lightning thing that people brought up before. Early humans were trying to cope and came up with gods though the best reasoning they knew how and taught their youth. If something didn't work for the youths or the generations following they reasoned other things (much like the many interpretations of religious texts today). So, basically what I'm trying to say is that faith isn't faith at all, but a reasoning that is passed down through nurture. I'll be it bad reasoning, but reasoning none-the-less...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 5:56 pm
I like that! So you're saying that perhaps religion and reason are two faces of the same thing? Of course they have evolved over time... but that's interesting.
(Random, I know, but whenever I get too into the dignity of religion, I have this image of the Pope and the king excommunicating eachother when the Holy Roman Empire was still around. Keeps me honest. xd )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:23 pm
I've always enjoyed this sort of discussion. 3nodding
I'm reading a book of Philosophy at the moment, and I just got done reading several chapters dedicated to this very subject.
There are people who believe that it is irrational to believe anything without sufficient proof that it is true. Without proper evidence they believe that you should either withhold judgement, or assume that it is false.
This approach is not always practical, or even rational.
After many pages of mind-bending, thought-provoking discussion, the author of the book concluded that it is indeed sometimes rational to believe some things without sufficient evidence.
After this, the book states that you it is never rational to believe in something without sufficient evidence if that evidence is available.
This statement was proven to be also sometimes false.
Finally it was provided that it is rational to believe something without sufficient evidence, when there is evidence available when the following is true:
-The situation could be believably true
-The consequences of withholding judgement could be the same as disbelieving the situation
-Something of great importance could be at stake
+++
After all of that talking, I would like to say that I agree with the book.
I believe that reason should preside over faith as is possible.
But there are certain times when faith is called for. smile
-Alezunde
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:41 pm
I would have to say both. Personally, when I have questions about what road I should take in life, I consult the bible. I've been told I'm 'mad', or even better I 'have the God gene'. My 'reasoning'? We, as humans, are not perfect, nor is our logic. What may seem 'reasonable' to me at this point in my life may not in fact be what is right, however, I believe, God is not within time constraints. He can see all the pieces of the puzzle - I'd rather put my trust in him. No, he cannot be 'proved', so I suppose faith comes first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
