The Circle of Faith:Why Faith is NOT a Good Thing

Originally posted by americandingbat
I'm really distressed that so many in this thread perceive faith as synonymous with a specific presentation of christian dogma, and that despite it having been pointed out by numerous posters in numerous ways, are unwilling to question their assumption about what faith is and can be.

You gotta remember that the word faith is an unfortunate placeholder for "religious beliefs"
And that is really what the OP is arguing. Obviously people like you and I, will object that faith by itself is not bad, but the title has mislead most in here.

Everyone's got an agenda.

Originally posted by americandingbat
I really doubt that you'll find most, or even many, psychologists who will agree with the statement "the power of faith is to distort reality, not present it."

Most psychologists recognize the extraordinary importance of faith to the human mind and emotions. Not faith in any one thing or other, but FAITH itself.

Faith is not the belief that there is a gray-bearded giant above the cloud cover who toys with humanity and punishes them for being human.

I'm really distressed that so many in this thread perceive faith as synonymous with a specific presentation of christian dogma, and that despite it having been pointed out by numerous posters in numerous ways, are unwilling to question their assumption about what faith is and can be.

There ARE other definitions of faith which you and others keep referring to. I thought I made it quite clear what I was reffering to with this thread.
100% belief with no evidence.

I have 'faith' that I'm going to get a good job, find my 'soulmate', have 3 kids, and die an old man.
That's not 100% belief. I don't KNOW that it's going to happen, I just hope that it will and am leaving the door open for it. Moreover, there's evidence that people can find good jobs, can find someone they love, can have 3 kids, and can die old.
That example is a completely different definition of faith than what I'm talking about in this thread - but it seems people keep confusing it.

Originally posted by americandingbat
Most psychologists recognize the extraordinary importance of faith to the human mind and emotions. Not faith in any one thing or other, but FAITH itself.

So they think it's important for a person to have a 100% 'knowing' of something which has no evidence - something they couldn't know?
You see this most often in nut houses, I doubt any psychologist would consider that good.
Common ordinary everyday trust or hope? Yeah, everyone considers that good.

100% belief with no evidence.

Ummm that definition belongs to ignorance. Maybe its YOU who is argueing the wrong term..... and the religious nuts are using the wrong one as well.

You should focus instead on proving how they are really using IGNORANCE. not faith.... faith requires evidence of a pattern.

Your putting yourself on a threadmill trying to break a word.... which is impossible.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Ummm that definition belongs to ignorance.

Yes, that's why I made that connection in my first post.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Maybe its YOU who is argueing the wrong term..... and the religious nuts are using the wrong one as well.

I've made it repeatidly clear which term I am using.

2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

"firm belief in something for which there is no proof"...
Hmmm... sounds familiar...
Perhaps having a firm belief in a book which is thousands of years old, for which there is no evidence of the extraordinary events therein.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Your putting yourself on a threadmill trying to break a word.... which is impossible.

Nope.
www.merriam-webster.com...

Well i guess even people that make dictionarys can be confused....

i noticed there was no inclusion of a definition that includes proof, much like i have discribed. Why do you think that would be? That only half of such a definition is included?

Yet agian i will state to you.... unless you start clarifying what word you wish to replace faith with you will get nowhere.

Both you and the religious nuts are barking up the wrong tree... faith exists and rightly so in evidence.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
I've made it repeatidly clear which term I am using.

2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

"firm belief in something for which there is no proof"...
Hmmm... sounds familiar...
Perhaps having a firm belief in a book which is thousands of years old, for which there is no evidence of the extraordinary events therein.

Having a firm belief is not the same thing as having 100% belief – ask the prosecutors of O.J.Simpson if you doubt me. And even the greatest of Christian saints have had moments of doubt – faith is something that is fought for by many even if it comes naturally to some.

But beyond that – having a firm belief that we have a purpose both individually and collectively is a faith that many agnostics like me hold dear and sometimes struggle to keep.

It is not faith that is the problem; it is the object of that faith.

Christians have faith not in the Bible but in God. The Bible tells them what God can and has done, what he wants of them, and what will come. Most of them believe that the Bible was "divinely inspired" meaning the truths within were given to man directly by God. Relatively few believe that every word in a specific translation of the Bible must be interpreted literally.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by americandingbat
I'm really distressed that so many in this thread perceive faith as synonymous with a specific presentation of christian dogma, and that despite it having been pointed out by numerous posters in numerous ways, are unwilling to question their assumption about what faith is and can be.

There ARE other definitions of faith which you and others keep referring to. I thought I made it quite clear what I was reffering to with this thread.
100% belief with no evidence.

I have 'faith' that I'm going to get a good job, find my 'soulmate', have 3 kids, and die an old man. *shorten quote* That example is a completely different definition of faith than what I'm talking about in this thread - but it seems people keep confusing it.

If I made a thread called "I saw an elephant crossing Queens Boulevard yesterday – that's no good what's the world come to?" and illustrated it with a picture of stray cat running across the street, I would expect people to point out that what I thought was an elephant was, in fact, a cat. This being ATS, I would also expect a number of opinions on what exactly is wrong with elephants, cats, Queens Boulevard, and the world. And probably a few people saying "wow, that is amazing. And look how small that elephant is – do you think genetically modified foods are the culprit?"

You made a thread called "Why Faith is NOT a Good Thing" and used no example other than fundamentalist christian dogma. I'm just here to point out that that is not faith, it is fear.

I haven't seen any evidence of the anti-faith posters in this thread thinking about whether it's faith itself they really object to, or just the particular things that some people choose to put their faith in. You are putting a lot of faith in the proposition that nothing that cannot be experienced through our five senses is of any importance.

Most psychologists recognize the extraordinary importance of faith to the human mind and emotions. Not faith in any one thing or other, but FAITH itself.

So they think it's important for a person to have a 100% 'knowing' of something which has no evidence - something they couldn't know?
You see this most often in nut houses, I doubt any psychologist would consider that good.
Common ordinary everyday trust or hope? Yeah, everyone considers that good.

Again, it depends on the object of the faith.

Most psychologists would recognize the important role that religion plays in the psychological makeup of humans. I believe (though I don't have statistics) that most psychologists would consider themselves to have faith.

It's just a hunch, but I think if you probed hard enough you would find that every human being (with the possible exception of sociopaths or psychopaths) has faith, defined in your way, in something.

reply to post by Wertdagf


I don't care what definition you are using, I've made it quite clear which definition I am using, and it's the one which most of the religious population uses.

100% knowing of something which can't be known - as there is no evidence.

I don't want to argue about this anymore. If you want to argue, contact merriam-webster and tell them they were 'confused' when they wrote the definition.

Of course the main culprit of this is Christianity, believing that it's a good thing not to have evidence and to simply accept what was written down thousands of years prior and translated multiple times.
Whether you consider it good or bad, it certainly is not logical.


today in the philippines there is an ongoing frenzy show of faithfulness and devotion to a burnt out "miraculous" effigy of christ and the catholic church and its leaders, the bishops and priests and government officials are euphoric claiming how faithful filipinos are...a faith and belief system handed down to these people by a conquering nation that was and still is the main reason why we never really mature as a country.in fact this leap of faith that they embrace was very convenient for the state and the church to strangle the whole populace.the government of this country, philippines seems to be at odds with the church but in depth they really are taking turns abusing their own people.and this because of the simple faith seeded by christianity and the status qou.when will we ever learn???

[edit on 9-1-2009 by enkira]

reply to post by americandingbat


Many Christians do say that they don't have any doubts - that they know 100% that God exists. The vast majority of Christians I've talked to say that.
That is what I'm arguing against.
You keep thinking I'm arguing against something else when I'm not.

Originally posted by americandingbat
If I made a thread called "I saw an elephant crossing Queens Boulevard yesterday – that's no good what's the world come to?" and illustrated it with a picture of stray cat running across the street, I would expect people to point out that what I thought was an elephant was, in fact, a cat.

Careful, your strawman is showing .
I made it clear which definition of faith I'm talking about.
Faith is a broad term, which is why I said exactly what I was arguing against.
Several times...

Originally posted by americandingbat
You made a thread called "Why Faith is NOT a Good Thing" and used no example other than fundamentalist christian dogma. I'm just here to point out that that is not faith, it is fear.

That is what they consider faith, and that is what I'm arguing against.
This is why I originally put this thread in the "Conspiracies in Religions" forum, but it was moved to the "Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics" forum.
Even so, I've made it very clear what it is I'm arguing against.

Originally posted by americandingbat
You are putting a lot of faith in the proposition that nothing that cannot be experienced through our five senses is of any importance.

Not at all! Not even close.
I'm saying that it's illogical to have such a firm belief in something which has as much evidence as pink unicorns.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by americandingbat

 

Many Christians do say that they don't have any doubts - that they know 100% that God exists. The vast majority of Christians I've talked to say that.
That is what I'm arguing against.
You keep thinking I'm arguing against something else when I'm not.

But everything you use to back your arguments is not about whether or not God exists, but to things like evolutionary theory, specific commandments, points of contention in the Bible.

And nothing you've said takes into consideration other faiths at all.

Originally posted by americandingbat
If I made a thread called "I saw an elephant crossing Queens Boulevard yesterday – that's no good what's the world come to?" and illustrated it with a picture of stray cat running across the street, I would expect people to point out that what I thought was an elephant was, in fact, a cat.

Careful, your strawman is showing

.
I made it clear which definition of faith I'm talking about.
Faith is a broad term, which is why I said exactly what I was arguing against.
Several times...

It wasn't really a straw man, since I didn't insinuate that you were in fact calling cats elephants – I made it out there so that only the pertinent point – who defines a word – was held in common.

The analogy was meant to say "you can't just define a common English word however you want – if you do people will come let you know you're using the wrong word."

Originally posted by americandingbat
You made a thread called "Why Faith is NOT a Good Thing" and used no example other than fundamentalist christian dogma. I'm just here to point out that that is not faith, it is fear.

That is what they consider faith, and that is what I'm arguing against.

Maybe you could get the title of the thread changed to "Fundamentalist Christian Faith is not a Good Thing" or even "Fundamentalist Religious Faith is not a Good Thing?" Then I'd leave you alone, because I more or less agree with those statements. I'd rather say "Fundamentalist Faith leads to bad things" but I would let it pass

This is why I originally put this thread in the "Conspiracies in Religions" forum, but it was moved to the "Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics" forum.
Even so, I've made it very clear what it is I'm arguing against.

Sometimes Mods move in mysterious ways.

Do you think that the faith I struggle to keep, that I specifically and we generally have a purpose, is a Bad Thing?

Originally posted by americandingbat
You are putting a lot of faith in the proposition that nothing that cannot be experienced through our five senses is of any importance.

Not at all! Not even close.
I'm saying that it's illogical to have such a firm belief in something which has as much evidence as pink unicorns.

And then you're leaping straight from "illogical" to "bad". And along the way dismissing any evidence of God's existence that doesn't come through our senses but through "feeling God's love/peace" – as though it is unimportant because it's not external to us.


(a couple edits to fix nested quotes)

[edit on 1/9/09 by americandingbat]

Originally posted by americandingbat
But everything you use to back your arguments is not about whether or not God exists, but to things like evolutionary theory, specific commandments, points of contention in the Bible.

And nothing you've said takes into consideration other faiths at all.

Those were examples.
I could talk about other faiths if you like, but Christianity is an example that most of us can relate to.
I could talk about how some people have faith that people are out to get them, causing them to live a paranoid and seperated life.

Originally posted by americandingbat
It wasn't really a straw man, since I didn't insinuate that you were in fact calling cats elephants – I made it out there so that only the pertinent point – who defines a word – was held in common.

The analogy was meant to say "you can't just define a common English word however you want – if you do people will come let you know you're using the wrong word."

Yes, I got the message, but my point was that I didn't make it up.

Originally posted by americandingbat
Do you think that the faith I struggle to keep, that I specifically and we generally have a purpose, is a Bad Thing?

Your purpose is whatever you make it.
Our main purpose is to live.
I don't really know what you have faith in though...
Do you believe that there's a 'higher purpose'? If so, why?
Is it just a hope, or is it an absolute belief?
If you 100% believe that we all have a 'higher' purpose but don't know why, then that's illogical. Not necessarily bad, just illogical.
It's exactly as illogical as me believing that pink unicorns roam the prairies in a distant universe. Who's to say they don't? But if I have an absolute belief in something that I couldn't know, that's illogical.
If you simply believe that we all may have a higher purpose but you aren't sure, then that's just hope - and there's nothing wrong with that.

Originally posted by americandingbat
And then you're leaping straight from "illogical" to "bad". And along the way dismissing any evidence of God's existence that doesn't come through our senses but through "feeling God's love/peace" – as though it is unimportant because it's not external to us.

But I explained exactly HOW such feelings can come to you. They come from faith. If you have faith that everyone is out to get you, you will be paranoid. Is paranoia evidence that everyone is out to get you? Of course not, just as a feeling of love or peace is not evidence that any God exists.

[edit on 9-1-2009 by TruthParadox]

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by americandingbat
But everything you use to back your arguments is not about whether or not God exists, but to things like evolutionary theory, specific commandments, points of contention in the Bible.

And nothing you've said takes into consideration other faiths at all.

Those were examples.
I could talk about other faiths if you like, but Christianity is an example that most of us can relate to.

Your image of Christianity is not one I can relate to. I have spent my entire life in areas of the U.S. where fundamentalist Protestants are a small and not particularly powerful minority. Since I currently live in a city of over 8 million people, I am hard pressed to believe that my experience is not reasonably common in America. It would be pretty cool if you would talk about other faiths as well. Particularly about faith in a non-dogmatic sense.

I could talk about how some people have faith that people are out to get them, causing them to live a paranoid and seperated life.

I don't think you can say that anyone has "faith" that people are out to get them, though they might have "faith" that they matter enough for someone to bother. Although admittedly it's not included in your dictionary definition, I think that there's an implication of something either superhuman or desirable when you talk about faith.

But even in that scenario, is it not the object of the faith that's the problem, not the faith itself? That is, the problem is not that the paranoiac believes 100% in something without proof, but that he believes 100% in something that causes him to harm himself.

If instead of believing that people were out to get him, he believed that pink unicorns lived on Mars, there wouldn't be any particular problem. It would be an illogical belief, and he probably wouldn't find many people who share it, but unless he demanded that everyone else believe in the pink unicorns and had the power to back up that demand, it's not something we need to worry about.

Originally posted by americandingbat
Do you think that the faith I struggle to keep, that I specifically and we generally have a purpose, is a Bad Thing?

Your purpose is whatever you make it.
Our main purpose is to live.
I don't really know what you have faith in though...
Do you believe that there's a 'higher purpose'? If so, why?
Is it just a hope, or is it an absolute belief?
If you 100% believe that we all have a 'higher' purpose but don't know why, then that's illogical. Not necessarily bad, just illogical.

I try my best to believe 100% that there is a higher purpose to human life. I'm not always successful – in fact I rarely am. I spend most of my time on the fence, afraid that there is no purpose, but never sure of that either.

But I try to always behave in accordance with there being a higher purpose, and I do what I can to increase the connections that I have felt to a higher purpose, to nurture them rather than doubting them. And I come into threads like this to try to defend the human capacity for faith when I think people are confusing the feeling with its object.

Admittedly, me sitting in my apartment trying to believe that the universe has meaning beyond what we give it is a far cry from some megachurch preacher telling hundreds of thousands of followers that their faith is endangered by the prospect of two adults who are in love having that love recognized by the state. But don't let that preacher define "faith" for you. There are many ways of having a strong belief in the unproveable that don't involve hate or degradation of other humans.

To say that it is FAITH that is the problem, and not particular examples of faith, you would have to demonstrate that faith ALWAYS leads to undesirable ends. I'm not disputing that some people have illogical beliefs that cause them and others harm, and if you want to think of them as a form of faith, that's fine.

A 100% belief that there is meaning in life is by your definition faith. And it may be illogical, but I can't agree that it's not a good thing.

Misplaced faith does not make well placed faith bad, any more than misplaced trust makes well placed trust bad.

If you simply believe that we all may have a higher purpose but you aren't sure, then that's just hope - and there's nothing wrong with that.

If I aspire to believe in it completely, it is faith. A Christian may doubt God's love for him when he goes through terrible things – his faith is tried and tested.

edit: dang nesting quotes.

[edit on 1/9/09 by americandingbat]

Originally posted by americandingbat
Your image of Christianity is not one I can relate to. I have spent my entire life in areas of the U.S. where fundamentalist Protestants are a small and not particularly powerful minority. Since I currently live in a city of over 8 million people, I am hard pressed to believe that my experience is not reasonably common in America.

So you think that the number of Christians who say that they 'know' that God exists is small?
Sorry, that's not at all what I've seen. Just look at people arguing on these threads... How many Christians even allow the possibility that they are wrong?

Originally posted by americandingbat
It would be pretty cool if you would talk about other faiths as well. Particularly about faith in a non-dogmatic sense.

What kinds of faith are you referring to? Having faith in a person (hope/trust)? That's not what I'm arguing against.

Originally posted by americandingbat
If instead of believing that people were out to get him, he believed that pink unicorns lived on Mars, there wouldn't be any particular problem. It would be an illogical belief, and he probably wouldn't find many people who share it, but unless he demanded that everyone else believe in the pink unicorns and had the power to back up that demand, it's not something we need to worry about.

I dunno... Personally, I like to see people being honest with themselves and others.

Originally posted by americandingbat
I try my best to believe 100% that there is a higher purpose to human life. I'm not always successful – in fact I rarely am. I spend most of my time on the fence, afraid that there is no purpose, but never sure of that either.

So fear is what drives you to have such faith. Why not be honest with yourself and admit that there's no way any of us could know either way? You're trying to force yourself to believe 100% something which we can not (as humans) know.

Originally posted by americandingbat
But I try to always behave in accordance with there being a higher purpose, and I do what I can to increase the connections that I have felt to a higher purpose, to nurture them rather than doubting them.

What does that even mean?
You nurture your faith to believe that there is a higher purpose? Why?
Because you're afraid that there might not be a higher purpose?
Sorry, I just don't understand that. I'd rather be honest with myself.
I'm a realist, you apparently aren't, and that's ultimately what it comes down to I suppose.

Originally posted by americandingbat
There are many ways of having a strong belief in the unproveable that don't involve hate or degradation of other humans.

Yes there are. Either way, it's illogical.
If I believe 100% (faith) that I will win the lottery, what purpose does it serve? Does it help my chances of actually winning the lottery? The chances are the same whether I have faith or not... So what does having faith truely accomplish? It's a way for us to cope with the fact that it probably won't happen. It's completely illogical because it's essentially tricking your mind into thinking that something will happen when you know deep down that there's no bases for such reasoning.

Now, you would say that if someone wishes to have such faith then it's completely fine - it doesn't hurt anyone. I partially agree. It doesn't hurt anyone in this example, it simply means that the person is ok with being dishonest with themselves in order to better cope with life.

Personally, I'd like to see a world where everyone could be honest with themselves and others - perhaps you could look at that as our 'purpose', to at least accept who we are.

But back to the example I gave above, even that is not nearly as extreme as believing in something which we don't even know is possible in our universe (God). At least we know that it's possible for a person to win the lottery, but believing something which is completely baseless is even worse in my opinion...

Originally posted by americandingbat
A 100% belief that there is meaning in life is by your definition faith. And it may be illogical, but I can't agree that it's not a good thing.

Actually, that's not the definition of faith I used... There is evidence that my life has meaning because I'm the one that gives it meaning. We all define our own purpose... But if you're talking about a 'higher purpose', then that's something else entirely.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
So you think that the number of Christians who say that they 'know' that God exists is small?

No, I'm saying that the number of Christians who stubbornly stick by a word-for-word literal interpretation of the Bible is relatively small. And the number who not only do that but also condemn all who don't is smaller yet.

The number of Christians who say they know God exists is very high, although I bet most of them would admit to entertaining doubts in dark times.

There is no proof that God does not exist, just as there is no proof that he does. A 100% belief in God is not despite evidence to the contrary, which appeared to be what you were asserting that faith demands in your opening.

Sorry, that's not at all what I've seen. Just look at people arguing on these threads... How many Christians even allow the possibility that they are wrong?

About as many as atheists

But the "Conspiracies in Religion" and "Creationism" Forums on ATS are not going to provide a representative sample of Christians.

Originally posted by americandingbat
It would be pretty cool if you would talk about other faiths as well. Particularly about faith in a non-dogmatic sense.

What kinds of faith are you referring to? Having faith in a person (hope/trust)? That's not what I'm arguing against.

No. You start getting closer when you address my personal beliefs. But how about taking on something like Buddhism instead, since they have the distinct advantage over me of having had more than a few years to work out their thoughts on faith.

Originally posted by americandingbat
I try my best to believe 100% that there is a higher purpose to human life. I'm not always successful – in fact I rarely am. I spend most of my time on the fence, afraid that there is no purpose, but never sure of that either.

So fear is what drives you to have such faith. Why not be honest with yourself and admit that there's no way any of us could know either way? You're trying to force yourself to believe 100% something which we can not (as humans) know.

I freely admit that there's no way any of us can prove it either way. I'm looking for a knowledge that does not demand proof – in other words, a faith.

I wouldn't really say fear is the driving force, either. At the times when I feel most comfortable in myself and in the world, I trust that there is a reason for it all (yes, I mean a higher or at least non-human purpose). It's part of that circle that you think is so terrible, I think.

What does that even mean?

You nurture your faith to believe that there is a higher purpose? Why?
Because you're afraid that there might not be a higher purpose?
Sorry, I just don't understand that. I'd rather be honest with myself.
I'm a realist, you apparently aren't, and that's ultimately what it comes down to I suppose.

If you think I'm not a realist, you haven't been reading. I am a realist struggling to let go of the need to prove everything. I was raised to have faith in nothing but myself, and I spent the first thirty years of my life rabidly opposed to anything that hinted at the existence of a monotheistic God. I nurture my faith to believe that there is a higher purpose because I have found that I am a better, more productive person when I look outside myself for support, when I trust that there is a beneficent force driving the universe, and I don't need to be so fearful.

I got so honest with myself that I realized I needed more than just myself. Now I work on believing in it.

Originally posted by americandingbat
There are many ways of having a strong belief in the unproveable that don't involve hate or degradation of other humans.

Yes there are. Either way, it's illogical.

Again with the "illogical"!

Illogical is not a synonym for "bad".

How do you feel about poetry or art?

If I believe 100% (faith) that I will win the lottery …

Now, you would say that if someone wishes to have such faith then it's completely fine - it doesn't hurt anyone. I partially agree. It doesn't hurt anyone in this example, it simply means that the person is ok with being dishonest with themselves in order to better cope with life.

It's a poor example, since there are easy ways to determine the likelihood of winning a lottery, but no conceivable way to determine the likelihood that life has meaning beyond itself.

Personally, I'd like to see a world where everyone could be honest with themselves and others - perhaps you could look at that as our 'purpose', to at least accept who we are.

Who we are is not independent, isolated units.

But back to the example I gave above, even that is not nearly as extreme as believing in something which we don't even know is possible in our universe (God). At least we know that it's possible for a person to win the lottery, but believing something which is completely baseless is even worse in my opinion...

Why? We have no evidence that God isn't possible in our universe, or even any way to measure the probability of there being a God in our universe.

On the other hand, we know exactly what the odds of winning the lottery are, and they're not exactly faith-inspiring.

Originally posted by americandingbat
A 100% belief that there is meaning in life is by your definition faith. And it may be illogical, but I can't agree that it's not a good thing.

Actually, that's not the definition of faith I used... There is evidence that my life has meaning because I'm the one that gives it meaning. We all define our own purpose... But if you're talking about a 'higher purpose', then that's something else entirely.

Yes, I was talking about a purpose in my life that is not provided by me – for which I have no proof, nor any hope of physically measurable evidence. I'm uncomfortable with words like "higher" and "lower" for reasons that aren't really pertinent to this thread, but have to do with rejection of the body as burdensome and sinful. Maybe I could go with "deeper purpose."

reply to post by americandingbat


Meh. I don't really know what to say. I'm arguing against something and you seem to want me to argue against something else...

Originally posted by americandingbat
I'm looking for a knowledge that does not demand proof – in other words, a faith.

Yes, that's all fine and dandy, but why hold such an absolute belief when you can never know if you're right?
You say that you ride on the fence about humans having a deeper purpose, so lets say your belief is at 50%.
Then you say that you nurture your faith, making it essentially 100% (over time).

What should be painfully obvious at this point is that the only function of faith was to ignore the initial 50%. Is that not illogical? You're tricking your mind to ignore rational thought in support of a comfortable belief. You're painting it to be some happy 'tralalalala' event, but the truth is you're shorthanding yourself of the truth.
I don't believe that I said all such faith is 'bad', just that it's not good. It's not the happy-go-lucky mystical aw-inspiring event that people paint it to be - it's more like a drug. Surely you can see that...

Originally posted by americandingbat
At the times when I feel most comfortable in myself and in the world, I trust that there is a reason for it all (yes, I mean a higher or at least non-human purpose).

There it is. "Comfortable"...
Personally, I'd rather search for the truth than be content with tricking my mind into believing I already had it.
I was very comfortable when I was a Christian...
It's like the matrix - would you stay in the matrix even knowing that it's a lie?

Originally posted by americandingbat
Again with the "illogical"!

Illogical is not a synonym for "bad".

How do you feel about poetry or art?

I love art! But I don't believe said art to be the absolute truth about reality. If I did, then I'd only be brainwashing myself - which is of course the subject of this thread...

I know, I'm pretty frustrated with this too.

I keep thinking maybe some progress is being made, and then deciding it's not

And I'm still where I was on page one:

Originally posted by TruthParadox
Faith is, quite simply, a belief which is void of evidence - sight, sound, smell, feel, or taste.
A belief which can not be verified - only believed by inferior means.

Who defines them as inferior?


Here's some responses to questions from your last post, just for the sake of not leaving loose ends:

Originally posted by TruthParadox

What should be painfully obvious at this point is that the only function of faith was to ignore the initial 50%.

But that's not obvious at all. The function of faith is to gain the second 50%. To teach myself to trust in something I can't see.

...Comfortable"...
Personally, I'd rather search for the truth than be content with tricking my mind into believing I already had it.

Comfortable is not the same thing as complacent. Nor does having faith that there is a "higher" truth mean knowing what it is.

It's like the matrix - would you stay in the matrix even knowing that it's a lie?

I'm not too good with matrix references, because I've only seen the first movie and thought that while it was good entertainment, it was hardly groundbreaking philosophically. But no, I would not stay in the matrix – that would be uncomfortable for me.

I love art! But I don't believe said art to be the absolute truth about reality. If I did, then I'd only be brainwashing myself - which is of course the subject of this thread...

Yay! We can agree on something!

Loving art, that is. I think art is wonderful in part because it expresses truths about the reality of the human condition that cannot be conveyed or understood through logic. Kind of like faith

As for brainwashing, I'm willing to investigate both scientifically verifiable and intuitively or spiritually felt truths. There is no contradiction between the two. Believing in the contradiction, whether from the point of view of the fundamentalist or of the radical materialist, seems more like being brainwashed to me.

Faith and how it can become dangerous!


Im all about freedom to belive in fairy tales!!
Belive what you wish, if that helps you get through the day then go for it.
But its when it starts hurting others, and creating wars, and death..
Well we have a problem.

I have found my own way to find my personal God.. Without it hurting others.

I belive that science and religion can come hand in hand..
A bonding between science and religion would be a wonderful thing!!

I honestly feel religion doesnt hold all the answers.. And neither does science.. But together, I think we could bring on a new age of understanding..
If some of those bible thumpers could put down the bible for a min and listen.. Same with those science guys.. Look put down the test tube..
There is much we can learn from eachother..
And NO one has to die either!!!

What bothers me about Faith are people like Pat Robertson.. Who feel faith is in a nuke, or stronger arms..

reply to post by One4truth

It takes an extreme amount of faith to believe in the THEORY of evolution. Creation is truth and evolution is lacking that. Evolution doesn't even have facts to beleave in, all it is is a set of guesses to hopefully count out the possibility of there being a god to answer to.

Yes, it takes extreme faith to believe that science has all the answers or will eventually. I see many of my atheist friends on ATS that have this kind of faith.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


Your post was outstanding! I couldn't have said it better myself.

It's very unlikely that most of you have ever met a person of true Faith. If you had met such a person, you would remember it. They're not always religious fanatics. Sometimes they are conquerors. Some may be engineers or artists or even scientists. More often than not, we recognize them as eminently self-assured and dynamic individuals who plow through our existence, demolishing accepted dogma and rewriting the rules as they go.

Oh, we are out there but are usually discounted because we do not speak the same speak!! We are called heretics, anti-Christs, fools, arrogant and know-it-alls. Anytime we go against the tide it brings persecution of sorts, except it doesn't stop us!

The original poster doesn't seem to have any idea of what science really is.

Science is based for the vast majority, on assumptions, theories and ideas,
facts have little to do with it. Some things are accepted as fact, and branded
as such, because they correspond with the overall accepted theories that go
around at that time, when something that is equally true and proven, does
not match with the theories, assumptions and ideas used by the lead people,
it is not accepted as fact. More often than not, untrue items are accepted as
fact, and true items are not accepted as fact.

In light of this, I don't see any reason why faith would be inferior to science,
both faith and science are based on theories, assumptions and ideas, there
really is little difference between them.

You really shouldn't be telling people what to think, my friend, it's not very
positive or constructive. Your idea of reality is not any better than that of my
cat or that of a worm. Everyone has the right to choose his own ideas and
beliefs, choose what to have faith in, without being called an idiot for it.. as
no one's ideas are better or superior to that of the other.