NationStates

United New England wrote:

Dogmeat wrote:The thing is though, when we're dealing with things like that - things that are real, but difficult to understand - then despite the inherent difficulty of these topics, over time experts begin to converge on consensus. Quantum mechanics is tricky and counter-intuitive, but vitally nobody who studies particles these days really disputes that, "this - apparently - is the way particles behave."

That's the opposite of what happens when it comes to God or religion. The "experts" only diverge. If they were all studying the same thing from different angles, they'd converge towards similar conclusions. But they don't.

Actually, many religions around the world share important ideas about morality and spirituality. Mystics is particular tend to demonstrate similarities regardless of culture. Of course they sometimes disagree, but people aren’t perfect.

Two things:
1) Humans being human are going to automatically share some ideas about morality. We all have the same intrinsic social instincts. Having said that,
2) Cultures tend to be pretty divergent unless and until they rub up against one another. The Mesoamericans didn't move towards monotheism at all, and didn't approach a deeper knowledge of God's love and the oneness of being so much as they moved towards, "Blood for Huītzilōpōchtli!"

I'm looking through all of this and I'm noticing a common problem in that so many people, both theistic in one sense, and atheistic in another are confusing the difference between faith, belief and fact. To look at the theistic issue, a faith or a belief is not a fact. It's not something that has been proven. It's something that either our minds tell us(belief) or our hearts tell us(faith) as a way of filling the void until the facts do become known. Giving away the answer to what I said earlier, I am a theist (I could so easily have not been, btw), but the point about belief and faith is not that we know but that we either believe or feel.

Turning now against the atheist side, (btw, you're normally the people I can best relate to, regardless of my faith because why should faith get in the way of that), there's a mistake in thinking that theistic beliefs/faiths are the only beliefs/faiths out there. Because of this, belief and faith often gets derogatised as a crutch. Yes it is a crutch and I'm happy to walk around with a crutch. Why wouldn't I? Would you tell a person with a broken leg to throw their crutch away. Thing is, faith and belief is a crutch that everyone needs. It doesn't have to be a theistic faith or a theistic belief. If you have faith in humanity, you have faith. If you have faith in your family/friends, you have faith. If you only have faith in yourself, that is faith. It's not theistic faith but it's no less a crutch. And crutches are okay. Because in such an inhospitable world as we're in where we don't even know if we'll survive today, we all need something to give us the mental strength to face it nonetheless. Because Elysium help anyone who responds to the coming darkness by closing their minds and their hearts to it.

Anyway. I could say more to that. If you want to debate it, feel free but at least think about what I've said first because something that, theists most especially but atheists too, too many people need to learn is that in order to talk, you also have to listen. And listening isn't done with the ears; only hearing is.

Oh. And one piece of advice for everyone; whether your faith is in yourself or in gods, don't spend too much time looking up because your feet is what you need to stand on and they're not above you.

I don't believe in god because I have no reason to. There is no evidence of god's existence, and everything points towards there not being one. Hence I don't believe one (or several) exists.

Diversita wrote:I'm looking through all of this and I'm noticing a common problem in that so many people, both theistic in one sense, and atheistic in another are confusing the difference between faith, belief and fact. To look at the theistic issue, a faith or a belief is not a fact. It's not something that has been proven. It's something that either our minds tell us(belief) or our hearts tell us(faith) as a way of filling the void until the facts do become known. Giving away the answer to what I said earlier, I am a theist (I could so easily have not been, btw), but the point about belief and faith is not that we know but that we either believe or feel.

Turning now against the atheist side, (btw, you're normally the people I can best relate to, regardless of my faith because why should faith get in the way of that), there's a mistake in thinking that theistic beliefs/faiths are the only beliefs/faiths out there. Because of this, belief and faith often gets derogatised as a crutch. Yes it is a crutch and I'm happy to walk around with a crutch. Why wouldn't I? Would you tell a person with a broken leg to throw their crutch away. Thing is, faith and belief is a crutch that everyone needs. It doesn't have to be a theistic faith or a theistic belief. If you have faith in humanity, you have faith. If you have faith in your family/friends, you have faith. If you only have faith in yourself, that is faith. It's not theistic faith but it's no less a crutch. And crutches are okay. Because in such an inhospitable world as we're in where we don't even know if we'll survive today, we all need something to give us the mental strength to face it nonetheless. Because Elysium help anyone who responds to the coming darkness by closing their minds and their hearts to it.

Anyway. I could say more to that. If you want to debate it, feel free but at least think about what I've said first because something that, theists most especially but atheists too, too many people need to learn is that in order to talk, you also have to listen. And listening isn't done with the ears; only hearing is.

Oh. And one piece of advice for everyone; whether your faith is in yourself or in gods, don't spend too much time looking up because your feet is what you need to stand on and they're not above you.

Very well put. Unfortunately, this is general, so I’m sure your point will be shot down immediately. Point aside, I’m atheist, I’ll preface with that, but your right, everyone has faiths, beliefs, feelings, even if they aren’t with a god or higher being, personally, my beliefs and feelings, and faith are in me, and my friends, and their abilities.

Diversita wrote:I'm looking through all of this and I'm noticing a common problem in that so many people, both theistic in one sense, and atheistic in another are confusing the difference between faith, belief and fact. To look at the theistic issue, a faith or a belief is not a fact. It's not something that has been proven. It's something that either our minds tell us(belief) or our hearts tell us(faith) as a way of filling the void until the facts do become known. Giving away the answer to what I said earlier, I am a theist (I could so easily have not been, btw), but the point about belief and faith is not that we know but that we either believe or feel.

Turning now against the atheist side, (btw, you're normally the people I can best relate to, regardless of my faith because why should faith get in the way of that), there's a mistake in thinking that theistic beliefs/faiths are the only beliefs/faiths out there. Because of this, belief and faith often gets derogatised as a crutch. Yes it is a crutch and I'm happy to walk around with a crutch. Why wouldn't I? Would you tell a person with a broken leg to throw their crutch away. Thing is, faith and belief is a crutch that everyone needs. It doesn't have to be a theistic faith or a theistic belief. If you have faith in humanity, you have faith. If you have faith in your family/friends, you have faith. If you only have faith in yourself, that is faith. It's not theistic faith but it's no less a crutch. And crutches are okay. Because in such an inhospitable world as we're in where we don't even know if we'll survive today, we all need something to give us the mental strength to face it nonetheless. Because Elysium help anyone who responds to the coming darkness by closing their minds and their hearts to it.

Anyway. I could say more to that. If you want to debate it, feel free but at least think about what I've said first because something that, theists most especially but atheists too, too many people need to learn is that in order to talk, you also have to listen. And listening isn't done with the ears; only hearing is.

Oh. And one piece of advice for everyone; whether your faith is in yourself or in gods, don't spend too much time looking up because your feet is what you need to stand on and they're not above you.

I think there’s an important caveat to theistic belief in that it isn’t really based on anything.
For example, take the oft used argument that you have “belief” that when you sit in your chair, it isn’t going to break. Difference here is that there exists plenty of evidence to suggest the chair won’t break. I.e. you’ve sat in it several times before without it breaking, statistically chairs don’t break more often than not, the existence of chairs that currently have people sat in them not breaking, etc. Belief in a deity has none of this supporting evidence.

Faith is worse than belief, because faith is quite literally believing regardless of evidence. I could, for example, see all the evidence that suggests this chair won’t break, I could have someone sit in it in front of me, showing it won’t break. I could have a carpenter test the chair for stability and declare it safe. Yet, if I have faith that this chair will break, then all of this evidence is meaningless. I’m just going to ignore it anyway.

Belief is shakey, but faith is foolish

I personally believe in the concept of a higher power.

I do not, however, believe in the concept of a perfect higher power, that is all knowing or otherwise.

Jolthig wrote:

Aellex wrote:Personal experience much like everyone here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I claim personal experience too for my faith.

Personal experience is what lead me to mine.

United New England wrote:

Kavagrad wrote:What’s more important that whether there is a god is which of the hundreds of deities that have existed throughout human history is/are the true god/s.

Until someone/something can prove to me that their god is, without question, the only god that could ever exist, there are simply too many possibilities, including those imperceptible to the human mind, to attempt to worship a deity/deities with any conviction.

What if all of those many deities are flawed interpretations of different aspects, facets, or roles of an infinite god that is not fully comprehensible to the human mind? We can’t even fully understand ourselves, so I highly doubt that anyone has ever fully comprehended any deity that may exist.

Same problem: provide evidence for your assertions, or they're bullshit.

Menassa wrote:

New Legland wrote:Okay, I think I addressed this in my post, it's just that it came to my mind after I posted it and I edited it too late: 'The article does say that "There would need to be the regular cycle of day and night, complete with sun, moon and stars that governed longer and shorter days and dry and wet seasons (day 4)," but unless this is a matter of semantics, the problem still stands.'

If that's the explanation, I completely understand.

Light may mean energy Dark may mean primeval matter,

So it's still wrong.

not enough information is given in the 11 or so verses of an English translation of Genesis to make normative claims about the 'facts' of the matter, from either side of the aisle.

So it doesn't, in fact, say anything useful, and therefore isn't evidence of the accuracy of the bible, which was the original claim.

Alvecia wrote:

Diversita wrote:I'm looking through all of this and I'm noticing a common problem in that so many people, both theistic in one sense, and atheistic in another are confusing the difference between faith, belief and fact. To look at the theistic issue, a faith or a belief is not a fact. It's not something that has been proven. It's something that either our minds tell us(belief) or our hearts tell us(faith) as a way of filling the void until the facts do become known. Giving away the answer to what I said earlier, I am a theist (I could so easily have not been, btw), but the point about belief and faith is not that we know but that we either believe or feel.

Turning now against the atheist side, (btw, you're normally the people I can best relate to, regardless of my faith because why should faith get in the way of that), there's a mistake in thinking that theistic beliefs/faiths are the only beliefs/faiths out there. Because of this, belief and faith often gets derogatised as a crutch. Yes it is a crutch and I'm happy to walk around with a crutch. Why wouldn't I? Would you tell a person with a broken leg to throw their crutch away. Thing is, faith and belief is a crutch that everyone needs. It doesn't have to be a theistic faith or a theistic belief. If you have faith in humanity, you have faith. If you have faith in your family/friends, you have faith. If you only have faith in yourself, that is faith. It's not theistic faith but it's no less a crutch. And crutches are okay. Because in such an inhospitable world as we're in where we don't even know if we'll survive today, we all need something to give us the mental strength to face it nonetheless. Because Elysium help anyone who responds to the coming darkness by closing their minds and their hearts to it.

Anyway. I could say more to that. If you want to debate it, feel free but at least think about what I've said first because something that, theists most especially but atheists too, too many people need to learn is that in order to talk, you also have to listen. And listening isn't done with the ears; only hearing is.

Oh. And one piece of advice for everyone; whether your faith is in yourself or in gods, don't spend too much time looking up because your feet is what you need to stand on and they're not above you.

I think there’s an important caveat to theistic belief in that it isn’t really based on anything.
For example, take the oft used argument that you have “belief” that when you sit in your chair, it isn’t going to break. Difference here is that there exists plenty of evidence to suggest the chair won’t break. I.e. you’ve sat in it several times before without it breaking, statistically chairs don’t break more often than not, the existence of chairs that currently have people sat in them not breaking, etc. Belief in a deity has none of this supporting evidence.

Faith is worse than belief, because faith is quite literally believing regardless of evidence. I could, for example, see all the evidence that suggests this chair won’t break, I could have someone sit in it in front of me, showing it won’t break. I could have a carpenter test the chair for stability and declare it safe. Yet, if I have faith that this chair will break, then all of this evidence is meaningless. I’m just going to ignore it anyway.

Belief is shakey, but faith is foolish

And what about faith in family. Not everyone's faith in family is supported by evidence. And faith in humanity is based on very little evidence, such evidence as does exist being matters of debate as to whether they even count as evidence. Would you say faiths in such things were also foolish? Even faith in yourself is taken by many without evidence to support it.

Diversita wrote:

Alvecia wrote:I think there’s an important caveat to theistic belief in that it isn’t really based on anything.
For example, take the oft used argument that you have “belief” that when you sit in your chair, it isn’t going to break. Difference here is that there exists plenty of evidence to suggest the chair won’t break. I.e. you’ve sat in it several times before without it breaking, statistically chairs don’t break more often than not, the existence of chairs that currently have people sat in them not breaking, etc. Belief in a deity has none of this supporting evidence.

Faith is worse than belief, because faith is quite literally believing regardless of evidence. I could, for example, see all the evidence that suggests this chair won’t break, I could have someone sit in it in front of me, showing it won’t break. I could have a carpenter test the chair for stability and declare it safe. Yet, if I have faith that this chair will break, then all of this evidence is meaningless. I’m just going to ignore it anyway.

Belief is shakey, but faith is foolish

And what about faith in family. Not everyone's faith in family is supported by evidence. And faith in humanity is based on very little evidence, such evidence as does exist being matters of debate as to whether they even count as evidence. Would you say faiths in such things were also foolish? Even faith in yourself is taken by many without evidence to support it.

Actually most people’s belief in their family is based on evidence. Namely all the years spent together, helping each other, and building trust.
Many people who have been let down or abused by their family do not have this belief. And I think we’d both probably agree that continuing to trust a family that has abused that trust is foolish. If somewhat understandable. The bond of family can be hard to break. But that doesn’t make it healthy.

Diversita wrote:

Alvecia wrote:I think there’s an important caveat to theistic belief in that it isn’t really based on anything.
For example, take the oft used argument that you have “belief” that when you sit in your chair, it isn’t going to break. Difference here is that there exists plenty of evidence to suggest the chair won’t break. I.e. you’ve sat in it several times before without it breaking, statistically chairs don’t break more often than not, the existence of chairs that currently have people sat in them not breaking, etc. Belief in a deity has none of this supporting evidence.

Faith is worse than belief, because faith is quite literally believing regardless of evidence. I could, for example, see all the evidence that suggests this chair won’t break, I could have someone sit in it in front of me, showing it won’t break. I could have a carpenter test the chair for stability and declare it safe. Yet, if I have faith that this chair will break, then all of this evidence is meaningless. I’m just going to ignore it anyway.

Belief is shakey, but faith is foolish

And what about faith in family. Not everyone's faith in family is supported by evidence. And faith in humanity is based on very little evidence, such evidence as does exist being matters of debate as to whether they even count as evidence. Would you say faiths in such things were also foolish? Even faith in yourself is taken by many without evidence to support it.

The difference here is that in the case of family and humanity we can say conclusively that they exist; God, on the other hand, cannot be conclusively proven to exist. The faith in family and humanity does not refer to their existence. Faith in God is faith in its existence.

Alvecia wrote:

Diversita wrote:
And what about faith in family. Not everyone's faith in family is supported by evidence. And faith in humanity is based on very little evidence, such evidence as does exist being matters of debate as to whether they even count as evidence. Would you say faiths in such things were also foolish? Even faith in yourself is taken by many without evidence to support it.

Actually most people’s belief in their family is based on evidence. Namely all the years spent together, helping each other, and building trust.
Many people who have been let down or abused by their family do not have this belief. And I think we’d both probably agree that continuing to trust a family that has abused that trust is foolish. If somewhat understandable. The bond of family can be hard to break. But that doesn’t make it healthy.

I'll agree with that, as someone foolish enough to have had faith in family, once upon a time. Although foolishness is often a consequence of need without provision. We need to have faith in something close to us. There's nothing close to us to have faith in so we take a leap. It's not a wise course but often it's one of only two choices; the other to just give up there and then.

The New California Republic wrote:

Diversita wrote:
And what about faith in family. Not everyone's faith in family is supported by evidence. And faith in humanity is based on very little evidence, such evidence as does exist being matters of debate as to whether they even count as evidence. Would you say faiths in such things were also foolish? Even faith in yourself is taken by many without evidence to support it.

The difference here is that in the case of family and humanity we can say conclusively that they exist; God, on the other hand, cannot be conclusively proven to exist. The faith in family and humanity does not refer to their existence. Faith in God is faith in its existence.

Faith in humanity isn't about whether it exists. That'd be silly. But there's more to faith than whether it exists. Primarily, it's a feeling of trust. The point is, the rules of faith don't change dependant on what the faith is in. Thing is, I would agree that staking my life on my faith would be beyond ridiculous. I would say that would be foolish to the extreme. But having trust in an existence that in no way gives an obligation to me or to anyone else, where's the harm. That's the thing. Faith doesn't impose rules of behaviour. It's a feeling. A crutch. You may as well say the almighty mop and bucket makes demands. Where the rules come in is with belief. That's why I tend to be a lot lighter on the beliefs and heavier on the faith.

Diversita wrote:

Alvecia wrote:Actually most people’s belief in their family is based on evidence. Namely all the years spent together, helping each other, and building trust.
Many people who have been let down or abused by their family do not have this belief. And I think we’d both probably agree that continuing to trust a family that has abused that trust is foolish. If somewhat understandable. The bond of family can be hard to break. But that doesn’t make it healthy.

I'll agree with that, as someone foolish enough to have had faith in family, once upon a time. Although foolishness is often a consequence of need without provision. We need to have faith in something close to us. There's nothing close to us to have faith in so we take a leap. It's not a wise course but often it's one of only two choices; the other to just give up there and then.

I disagree faith is at all necessary.

Diversita wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:The difference here is that in the case of family and humanity we can say conclusively that they exist; God, on the other hand, cannot be conclusively proven to exist. The faith in family and humanity does not refer to their existence. Faith in God is faith in its existence.

Faith in humanity isn't about whether it exists. That'd be silly. But there's more to faith than whether it exists. Primarily, it's a feeling of trust. The point is, the rules of faith don't change dependant on what the faith is in.

But on that basis faith in humanity and faith in God are qualitatively different and not really directly comparable. We can also attribute certain acts to humanity with a degree of certainty, enabling us to establish a feeling of trust based on said acts. Trying to do that with God, on the other hand, is much more difficult.

The New California Republic wrote:

Diversita wrote:
Faith in humanity isn't about whether it exists. That'd be silly. But there's more to faith than whether it exists. Primarily, it's a feeling of trust. The point is, the rules of faith don't change dependant on what the faith is in.

But on that basis faith in humanity and faith in God are qualitatively different and not really directly comparable. We can also attribute certain acts to humanity with a degree of certainty, enabling us to establish a feeling of trust based on said acts. Trying to do that with God, on the other hand, is much more difficult.

Yeah except faith in humanity is rarely ever a faith in anything supported by the evidence. I mean, if we were to say that we can trust that humanity is ever improving, look at the world around you. It might be more technological but it's no less barbaric than it was two thousand years ago. But we still have faith in the great strides at human development.

Diversita wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:But on that basis faith in humanity and faith in God are qualitatively different and not really directly comparable. We can also attribute certain acts to humanity with a degree of certainty, enabling us to establish a feeling of trust based on said acts. Trying to do that with God, on the other hand, is much more difficult.

Yeah except faith in humanity is rarely ever a faith in anything supported by the evidence. I mean, if we were to say that we can trust that humanity is ever improving, look at the world around you. It might be more technological but it's no less barbaric than it was two thousand years ago.

Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

The New California Republic wrote:

Diversita wrote:
Yeah except faith in humanity is rarely ever a faith in anything supported by the evidence. I mean, if we were to say that we can trust that humanity is ever improving, look at the world around you. It might be more technological but it's no less barbaric than it was two thousand years ago.

Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

Obviously. Because if we only commited evil acts, we would not exist, and thus any faith would not either

The blAAtschApen wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

Obviously. Because if we only commited evil acts, we would not exist, and thus any faith would not either

Wasn't what I meant, but I guess that is one way of interpreting it.

The New California Republic wrote:

Diversita wrote:
Yeah except faith in humanity is rarely ever a faith in anything supported by the evidence. I mean, if we were to say that we can trust that humanity is ever improving, look at the world around you. It might be more technological but it's no less barbaric than it was two thousand years ago.

Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

I think you're confusing the individual with the species there. At an individual basis, good acts do occur. It'd be ridiculous to say they don't. But look at the world around you and tell me what quotient the ration of good to bad occurs.

Btw. I know I'm being simplistic there because things are rarely as simply as 0 or 10. But, with 0 being bad and 10 being good, see if you can get an idea of how many 0's there are for every 10. How many 1's for every 9, etc. The odds are not in favour.

Diversita wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

I think you're confusing the individual with the species there. At an individual basis, good acts do occur. It'd be ridiculous to say they don't. But look at the world around you and tell me what quotient the ration of good to bad occurs.

Btw. I know I'm being simplistic there because things are rarely as simply as 0 or 10. But, with 0 being bad and 10 being good, see if you can get an idea of how many 0's there are for every 10. How many 1's for every 9, etc. The odds are not in favour.

I would argue they are actually. The news likes to make a big deal about all the issues we have, but humanity has never been in a better place than today. Good deeds outweigh bad imo, it’s just being good is “normal”, so it isn’t given as due attention

Diversita wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Faith in humanity is not only supported but created by evidence actually, through good works and the like. If humanity had carried out only evil acts throughout its existence then said faith wouldn't exist.

I think you're confusing the individual with the species there. At an individual basis, good acts do occur. It'd be ridiculous to say they don't.

Not at all, as where did I mention individuals? Good works can be collective or individual. I stand entirely behind what I said.

---

Diversita wrote:But look at the world around you and tell me what quotient the ration of good to bad occurs.

Impossible to say.

Alvecia wrote:

Diversita wrote:
I think you're confusing the individual with the species there. At an individual basis, good acts do occur. It'd be ridiculous to say they don't. But look at the world around you and tell me what quotient the ration of good to bad occurs.

Btw. I know I'm being simplistic there because things are rarely as simply as 0 or 10. But, with 0 being bad and 10 being good, see if you can get an idea of how many 0's there are for every 10. How many 1's for every 9, etc. The odds are not in favour.

I would argue they are actually. The news likes to make a big deal about all the issues we have, but humanity has never been in a better place than today. Good deeds outweigh bad imo, it’s just being good is “normal”, so it isn’t given as due attention

I gave up watching the news a long time ago. My experience comes from the street. From looking at people, from the very bottom where one homeless person will strip another homeless person of all their belongings to the very top where even our politicians are saying their need for more money is more important than another person's need to eat.

Diversita wrote:

Alvecia wrote:I would argue they are actually. The news likes to make a big deal about all the issues we have, but humanity has never been in a better place than today. Good deeds outweigh bad imo, it’s just being good is “normal”, so it isn’t given as due attention

I gave up watching the news a long time ago. My experience comes from the street. From looking at people, from the very bottom where one homeless person will strip another homeless person of all their belongings to the very top where even our politicians are saying their need for more money is more important than another person's need to eat.

Feelings aside, annecdotes about what you’ve admitted is the very bottom doesn’t make a strong representation of humanity as a whole