And along those lines much more besides! What I am on about is the repeated claim that g/God is real in some material-but-not-material sense. And to that I say prove it, which for any Christian understanding of God cannot be done. It's all belief, which is all real Christians claim, and that's fair enough. But a lot of the believers want in where they do not belong, making whole hosts of insupportable claims. And this in many cases to solicit contributions from the ignorant. That religion unprosecuted fraud. — tim wood
Framing it as a matter of "belief" is to make the topic exterior to experience by default. — Valentinus
Here is a quote, I found.
“If one must have faith in order to believe something, or believe in something, then the likelihood of that something having any truth or value is considerably diminished. The harder work of inquiry, proof, and demonstration is infinitely more rewarding, and has confronted us with findings far more "miraculous" and "transcendent" than any theology. Actually, the "leap of faith"—to give it the memorable name that Soren Kierkegaard bestowed upon it—is an imposture. As he himself pointed out, it is not a "leap" that can be made once and for all. It is a leap that has to go on and on being performed, in spite of mounting evidence to the contrary. This effort is actually too much for the human mind, and leads to delusions and manias. Religion understands perfectly well that the "leap" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, which is why it often doesn't in fact rely on "faith" at all but instead corrupts faith and insults reason by offering evidence and pointing to confected "proofs." This evidence and these proofs include arguments from design, revelations, punishments, and miracles. Now that religion's monopoly has been broken, it is within the compass of any human being to see these evidences and proofs as the feeble-minded inventions that they are.”
― Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything — Corvus
I would take issue with the first sentence of the quote. I must have faith in the Covid vaccine to allow it to be administered. Lots of people have this faith. People who lack faith do not take the vaccine. There are people for whom no amount of evidence will instill faith and they will still refuse. So faith is necessary. But I am sure that this need for faith does not prove the vaccine's inefficacy. — Cuthbert
“If one must have faith in order to believe something, or believe in something, then the likelihood of that something having any truth or value is considerably diminished. — Corvus
↪180 Proof Placebos do require faith. Without it they don't work
— Janus
This one.
— 180 Proof
10/10
Let the faithless behold! That's made my day. :) — bert1
Evidence warranting assent to this statement is, I think, overwhelming: living by faith alone, a person will starve long before s/he'll starve from living by bread alone. — 180 Proof
We can also agree that bread alone is bad. "Faith" may be a viable suppliment, it's just not a necessary or indispensable one, and doesn't sustain either body or mind for very long compared to bread (& water). Reason, contemplation, aesthetics (e.g. literature, music), friendship, love, family, scientific inquiry, etc are viable alternatives to "faith" separately or in combinations. I've never had need of "faith" even, so far, in my darkest, most harrowing moments (which, raised and educated Catholic yet never relapsing to / overwhelmed by subconsciously "religious" imagery or feelings, has surprised me).The bigger question is whether you will be starved (in the metaphorical sense) of anything if you have no faith. — Hanover
"False belief" (i.e. make-believe, delusion) is "faith". :roll: — 180 Proof
We can also agree that bread alone is bad. "Faith" may be a viable suppliment, it's just not a necessary or indispensible one, and doesn't sustain either body or mind for very long compared to bread (& water). Reason, contemplation, aesthetics (e.g. literature, music), friendship, love, family, scientific inquiry, etc are viable alternatives to "faith" separately or in combinations. I've never had need of "faith" even, so far, in my darkest, most harrowing moments (which, raised and educated Catholic yet never relapsing to / overwhelmed by subconsciously "religious" imagery or feelings, has surprised me ). — 180 Proof
I also try to live by Hillel the Elder's golden rule. So what does "faith" have to do with any of that? — 180 Proof
"False belief" (i.e. make-believe, delusion) is "faith" — 180 Proof
No, never, as best as I can recall, which only became clear a short time after I'd "broken" with the church and before I'd graduated from Catholic high school. Superficially, maybe, I'd always been a 'true believer' in evidence alone.So keep that in mind when I ask if you've ever been of faith, not as someone who was dragged to church by a well intended parent, or as a dutiful son or young man carrying out his good citizenship, but as a true believer. — Hanover
Oh, I do not, and revere Hillel for his religiosity insofar as it shows how irreligious the vast majority of adherents to Abrahamic religions have always been and still are (e.g. Dostoyevsky's "Grand Inquisitor"). That said, his formulation of the golden rule is the same as Confucius had expressed four centuries earlier, which shows that the respective religious contexts are hardly relevant. "Faith" is nothing but an anti-anxiety placebo, at most, that does not add anything substantively epistemic to claims made on that basis.So you can separate out perhaps Hillel's views from religious belief, but you can't separate out Hillel from his religion.
"Faith" is nothing but an anti-anxiety placebo, at most, that does not add anything substantively epistemic to claims made on that basis. — 180 Proof
If a belief cannot be warranted and yet is claimed to be true, assent to it is unwarranted, or indistinguishable in the circumstance from being false. It's patently false to claim a mere idea (i.e. unwarranted belief, opinion, fantasy, etc) is warranted when it is not. — 180 Proof
I don't need to have a broken back or third degree burns over most of my body to know they are excrutiating, even unbearable. I've observed and have known well many people of "faith" in my time and so, as far as I'm concerned, the generalization is apt. Glad you're chill though. :up:But you've never had faith, so how do you know this? — Hanover
Well, pay attention :point:I'm not following this.
Yeah, and an unwarranted belief (e.g. faith) that asserts itself as warranted even though it's not (e.g. miracle) does not correspond to reality.A statement is true if it corresponds to reality.
Yeah, and an unwarrant belief (e.g. faith) that asserts itself as warranted even though it's not (e.g. miracle) does not correspond to reality. — 180 Proof
Faith isn't the belief. Faith is the justification for the belief. — Hanover
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.