When I think of faith, I don’t necessarily think of God or religion. — Fire Ologist

Neither do I, but clearly religion is the quintessential exemplar and that makes it an excellent subject to focus on.

The point being love. — Fire Ologist

What do you think that implies?

But praxis, “a nuclear family that enforces patriarchy, heteronormativity, or other power dynamics” is, to me, completely off the topic of what is faith. — Fire Ologist

That's off topic but not moms and dads loving their kids?

The point being love.
— Fire Ologist

What do you think that implies? — praxis

Nothing relevant to this discussion. You might infer I have kids and I love them. But that is not why I said it. I don’t think I could be any clearer about why I said it. There is nothing you need to infer.

I’d rather not be talking about the relevance of Abraham attempting murder or fathers loving their kids as the main discussion on the legitimate question “what is faith”.

clearly religion is the quintessential exemplar and that makes it an excellent subject to focus on. — praxis

Quintessential explar of what? Of faith?

Examples are great but not enough to answer “what is X”.

And when all the quintessential examples of faith as religion are fathers attempting murder of their bound children, and heinous crimes and jihad, that seems to reflect poorly on faith, which seems to me is more fundamentally neither good nor bad. So the religious examples are getting in the way.

Since there is an apparent conflict between the religious and the non-religious here, maybe religion is actually a bad example for us to figure out “what is faith” together.

Maybe we get to that later. Let’s assume people who act on faith sometimes kill others and other times sacrifice themselves to save others. Can we see “what is faith” and “what is an act of faith” without only focusing on people hurting people?

How about faith in the ability of the truth to sometimes be made plain here on TPF. Is that an example of faith, and if not, why not? What is faith then?

What do you think that implies? — praxis

Here is the quote in context. It seems pretty transparent:

So what I am saying above is, when I think of religious faith, I think of moms and dads loving their kids. The point being love.

Many on this thread, when they think of religious faith seem to think only of Abraham attempting murder, terroists bombing schools, etc. — Fire Ologist

Here is a quote from the OP of the whole thread:

6) Finally, why do Christians argue whether faith must have hope and love in order to cause salvation? Are not those three things always intertwined together? — Gregory

That hope and love are intertwined in faith indicates that its function has to do with human bonding rather than salvation. Why should salvation require faith?

That hope and love are intertwined in faith indicates that its function has to do with human bonding rather than salvation. — praxis

This is a good example of an assertion with no attached argument. I'm not sure why you would think this. An argument would provide me with some insight.

Why should salvation require faith? — praxis

Are you at all familiar with Christian theology? Or the Reformation polemics? I'm not sure where your starting point is.

Are you at all familiar with Christian theology? Or the Reformation polemics? I'm not sure where your starting point is. — Leontiskos

I have no doubt that it's extremely complicated.

Fundamentalists treat articles of faith as if they were empirical, evidence based facts, and that is where the trouble begins. If, instead, intellectual honesty prevailed and the faithful acknowledged that their faith is for them alone, between them and their God, so to speak, then they would not be arrogant enough to commit heinous acts purportedly in the name of God.
— Janus

Don’t you see how none of what you just said addresses what I asked?

All of what you just said contradicts “faith is neither good nor bad” because that all sounds bad. — Fire Ologist

I've already made it clear that faith is not confined to religion. It is to be found in ideologues of all persuasions. Facts are supported by evidence, faith is not. By 'evidence' I man 'what the unbiased should accept'; that is what being reasonable means. I don't mean 'what the individual finds convincing' because what convinces one individual may not convince another, and that it what should be expected in matters where there is no clear evidence.

We all hold beliefs for which there can be no clear evidence. To do so is not irrational, but those beliefs are nonrational, not in the sense that no thoughts processes are involved, but in the sense that the thoughts are not grounded in evidence.

You say that what I said about faith all sounds bad, but that was not about faith as such, but about faith not being acknowledged as such.

There's a lot in this. An ideology is another example of a belief that is not to be subjected to scrutiny. — Banno

That's right. That is the other key hallmark of faith-based beliefs. If a belief is not based on evidence then it is not open to question (for the believer, obviously), because there is no evidence to be critically examined.

faith is not confined to religion. It is to be found in ideologues of all persuasions. — Janus

Sounds like religion is bad. Like other ideological persuasions are bad.

Still sounds like a contradiction with “faith is neither good nor bad.”

not about faith as such, but about faith not being acknowledged as such. — Janus

Still sounds like acknowledging faith as such would be acknowledging a bad thing.

How about faith in your own ability to lead a team of soldiers? Any faith needed to do something new and seemingly impossible with people depending on you?

Any faith needed to depend on someone else?

“Men, we might die, I forget why we are here, it might not matter to anyone what we do, but follow me!!”

Any faith in that guy?

Or: “Men, we might die, you are here to stop the enemy from entering your home town with your wives and children, everything you do matters, and I will be with you until the job is done, now follow me!!

How about that guy?

Any time you take someone’s word you are exercising faith. Faith in that person.

Have you ever depended on someone? Put yourself at great risk without any ability predict the outcome except for one thing, you believe in that one specific guy who gave you his word.

What is faith?

faith is not confined to religion. It is to be found in ideologues of all persuasions.
— Janus

Sounds like religion is bad. Like other ideological persuasions are bad.

Still sounds like a contradiction with “faith is neither good nor bad.” — Fire Ologist

How many times do I have to say that I am saying that thinking faith is evidence based knowledge is what is bad? That kind of thinking is what people use as a justification for inflicting their beliefs on others. In case you haven't noticed ideologues, and not just religious ideologues, may be prepared to kill for what they believe in. If they acknowledged to themselves that what they believed was not the Absolute Truth but merely an expression of their own predilections, then they might understand that others need not share their beliefs.

Trust in one's abilities may be blind faith or it may be based on past success, so it is not a good analogy in the latter case at least. We do put our trust in other sometimes, and in life or death situations, someone must lead lest there be chaos. In that situation people do not trust their leader then there will also be the danger that order will break down into chaos, or 'every man for himself"―and that would obviously not be a good strategy for survival.

thinking faith is evidence based knowledge is what is bad — Janus

So thinking faith equals knowledge is bad.

We are still talking about badness. But I agree.

What I hear there is, ‘bad religion and bad science are bad.’ You follow me? Faith that is not faith but a replacement for science is bad religion; science that uses faith as evidence is bad science.

thinking faith is evidence based knowledge is what is bad — Janus

I can also see that what you are saying leaves room for thinking faith that is just faith is what is good, or at least, not bad.

But I think we still haven’t gotten away from a discussion about faith that involves badness.

I do appreciate this:

people do not trust their leader then there will also be the danger that order will break down into chaos, or 'every man for himself"―and that would obviously not be a good strategy for survival — Janus

Are you saying there is some kind of neutral/more positive sense of faith qua faith?

Are you saying, faith in leaders, in certain people, happens? And that such faith, could be a good strategy?

Because I agree with that too.

I still think with all that’s been said, most of which has involved stories of irrational people’s actions, none of us have adequately said “what is faith.”