Is faith a good way to believe?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
Gertie
Posts: 2181
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Gertie »

Nick A
Those like F4, Gertie, and Belindi appear to deny a lawful objective reality so naturally faith can only be an imaginary interpretation of that which doesn’t exist. In their eyes we are limited to creating our own reality.
That's not what I said. There's a difference between an objective reality existing, and the ability to know it.

The old certainties about what is objectively real are breaking down (God, morality, the nature of matter, the ability to know anything as a certainty itself) and we're better understanding our own limitations in accessing and understanding our interpretations of what might be real. In understanding ourselves, how we work, that we each create our own personalised models of reality, we can better identify our inherent biases and limitations. Science and self-reflection can help us with this, but we all handle it our own way.

The task ahead for us, is to find ways of living with this knowledge happily and healthily as individuals and societies.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Gertie:
That's not what I said. There's a difference between an objective reality existing, and the ability to know it.
I agree, We are living in Plato’s cave attached to the shadows on the wall so incapable of beginning to experience objective reality simultaneously with our minds, hearts, and sense organs. We become scattered creatures of reaction often in opposition with ourselves.
The old certainties about what is objectively real are breaking down (God, morality, the nature of matter, the ability to know anything as a certainty itself) and we're better understanding our own limitations in accessing and understanding our interpretations of what might be real. In understanding ourselves, how we work, that we each create our own personalised models of reality, we can better identify our inherent biases and limitations. Science and self-reflection can help us with this, but we all handle it our own way.
Do you believe the increased fragmentation of society into specializations is a good thing and will lead to further how you describe the task ahead?
The task ahead for us, is to find ways of living with this knowledge happily and healthily as individuals and societies.
My guess is that most would agree with you and knowledge through fragmentation would probably be considered the greatest goal of secularism. It may even be considered elitist to disagree

I disagree and it is difficult to explain why. Doing justice to the question of the value of fragmentation is beyond a post but I would like to at least introduce the other side of fragmentation by copying the first three paragraphs of this review of Dr. Nicolescu’s book especially for DM since I know he will feel its value. Take from it what you will.

http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/Reviews/NicolescuReview.htm
After reading Nicolescu's Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity, it is hard to imagine how any thinking person could retreat to the old, safe, comfortable conceptual framework. Taking a series of ideas that would be extremely thought-provoking even when considered one by one, the Romanian quantum physicist Basarab Nicolescu weaves them together in a stunning vision, this manifesto of the twenty-first century, so that they emerge as a shimmering, profoundly radical whole.

Nicolescu’s raison d’être is to help develop people’s consciousness by means of showing them how to approach things in terms of what he calls “transdisciplinarity.” He seeks to address head on the problem of fragmentation that plagues contemporary life. Nicolescu maintains that binary logic, the logic underlying most all of our social, economic, and political institutions, is not sufficient to encompass or address all human situations. His thinking aids in the unification of the scientific culture and the sacred, something which increasing numbers of persons, will find to be an enormous help, among them wholistic health practitioners seeking to promote the understanding of illness as something arising from the interwoven fabric—body, plus mind, plus spirit—that constitutes the whole human being, and academics frustrated by the increasing pressure to produce only so-called “value-free” material.

Transdisciplinarity “concerns that which is at once between the disciplines, across the different disciplines, and beyond all discipline,” and its aim is the unity of knowledge together with the unity of our being: “Its goal is the understanding of the present world, of which one of the imperatives is the unity of knowledge.” (44) Nicolescu points out the danger of self-destruction caused by modernism and increased technologization and offers alternative ways of approaching them, using a transdisciplinary approach that propels us beyond the either/or thinking that gave rise to the antagonisms that produced the problems in the first place. The logic of the included middle permits “this duality [to be] transgressed by the open unity that encompasses both the universe and the human being.” (56). Thus, approaching problems in a transdisciplinary way enables one to move beyond dichotomized thinking, into the space that lies beyond.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Belindi »

Nick_A wrote:
This is a very important observation IMO. Only people truly dedicated to wisdom can make the transition from the limitations of binary thought into conscious contemplation which opens us to the reality of the triune universe.
I can understand how someone who has never seen optical illusions or who has not studied epistemology can be so sure of their own perceptions and conceptions. But Nick?
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Belindi wrote:Nick_A wrote:
This is a very important observation IMO. Only people truly dedicated to wisdom can make the transition from the limitations of binary thought into conscious contemplation which opens us to the reality of the triune universe.
I can understand how someone who has never seen optical illusions or who has not studied epistemology can be so sure of their own perceptions and conceptions. But Nick?
"The mysteries of faith are degraded if they are made into an object of affirmation and negation, when in reality they should be an object of contemplation." ~ Simone Weil
What!! Something beyond the duality of affirmation and negation? Impossible. Pick your belief and argue. That is the secular way. Any other suggestions invite the men in the white coats to come and take you away. That Simone Weil woman never ceases to cause trouble.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Steve3007 »

You really to seem very keen on this Simone Weil person, Nick. Have you considered idolizing Buckminster Fuller? I hear he's very good.

I do think it's interesting that this website attracts a relatively large number of people who appear to fixate on a particular individual. An idol, if you will. Perhaps the explanation is that they are that person. Although that would be quite a boring explanation.

Sorry, this post is irrelevant to the topic. Feel free to have a moderator delete it.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Steve3007 wrote:You really to seem very keen on this Simone Weil person, Nick. Have you considered idolizing Buckminster Fuller? I hear he's very good.

I do think it's interesting that this website attracts a relatively large number of people who appear to fixate on a particular individual. An idol, if you will. Perhaps the explanation is that they are that person. Although that would be quite a boring explanation.

Sorry, this post is irrelevant to the topic. Feel free to have a moderator delete it.
No, it is relevant. I refer to Simone a lot because she cannot be associated with any particular teaching. I've noticed that secularists only understand collectives so cannot discuss ideas. Instead they argue collectives. But in Simone's case, the worst a person can do is curse out Simone. This makes it easier to discuss ideas.

As an aside, I see that the "Fake Education" thread is not wanted here. That being the case, I'll find another site to post it on and invite you and anyone else interested to discuss it there. It is too important a concept to just let die.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Steve3007 »

Re: Fake Education thread. Give it time. I believe that poor Greta is currently the only active moderator on this site and has to shoulder the burden of checking potential new topics for sanity and profanity alone.

I'm still not sure if I am one of these "secularists" of which you speak. It's a mystery to me.
User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1401
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Newme »

Hopefully this isn't a double post - other was lost somehow.

"All have faith but not all are conscious of having faith."

To pretend you are not having faith in anything - that you don't have limited, subjective beliefs is foolish.
What is more intelligent is to selectively apply faith.
“Empty is the argument of the philosopher which does not relieve any human suffering.” - Epicurus
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Steve3007 wrote:Re: Fake Education thread. Give it time. I believe that poor Greta is currently the only active moderator on this site and has to shoulder the burden of checking potential new topics for sanity and profanity alone.

I'm still not sure if I am one of these "secularists" of which you speak. It's a mystery to me.
Too late. I've already asked that it be deleted. This is just rude. It began in response to a current published observation. I'll post it in another forum.

I haven't discussed an idea with you. Could you discuss a Christian idea without ridiculing or condemning your conception of Christianity? A secularist cannot.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Steve3007 »

Could you discuss a Christian idea without ridiculing or condemning your conception of Christianity? A secularist cannot.
Yes. I could. If the inability to do that is the definition of "secularist" then I guess I'm not a secularist. I guess that must be good.

-- Updated Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:07 am to add the following --

Now that we've defined the term "secularist", is there a term for a person who is unable to discuss an atheistic idea (i.e. an idea which omits the concept of god or gods) without ridiculing or condemning it?

-- Updated Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:14 am to add the following --

Newme:
To pretend you are not having faith in anything - that you don't have limited, subjective beliefs is foolish.
I don't see why you see "not having faith in anything" and "not having limited subjective beliefs" as synonymous. I doubt whether there are very many people who think their beliefs are based on limitless and entirely objective knowledge. I'm sure there are some people who consider themselves to have godlike omniscience, but not many. But lacking knowledge does not automatically mean that faith has to take its place, does it? Isn't it possible to simply accept that we don't know lots of stuff without having to invoke the concept of faith?
Dark Matter
Posts: 1366
Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Dark Matter »

What is your ultimate concern, Steve?
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Belindi »

Fooloso4 wrote, regarding Plato's thought:
The cosmos is a natural whole and the Good is not outside that whole, and so, to call it supernatural is misleading. What is important for any reader of Plato to know is that there is no single, fully consistent and coherent logos that runs through and informs the dialogues. Every logos or account is limited, aporetic, and by bringing one aspect to light leaves others in the dark. There is no logos of the whole.
I understand the reason why "supernatural" , which I had suggested, is misleading.The wholeness and order of the Cosmos (Plato) now looks to me like panentheism not theism. When you say "there is no logos of the whole" do you mean that nobody can explain Cosmos absolutely but must in all reason do so only doubtingly and partially. If this is what you mean and it's true, the upshot is that The Sun which the philosopher king could see outside of the Cave , i.e. the Form of the Good , was what the philosopher king aspired to , or in other words the philosopher king's faith .

Is faith in the Good ultimate reality and so better than us prisoners' struggling efforts to see good and be good? Or was Plato saying that us prisoners are also and necessarily part of ultimate reality? If not then it looks to me that Plato is undemocratic. Unless Plato is saying that us prisoners can be brought into the light of the Sun.

-- Updated March 10th, 2017, 4:51 am to add the following --

My last paragraph is muddled. I'll sort it out.
Which are the case among the following:

1. The philosopher king remains the permanent elite among permanent prisoners in the Cave.

2. The prisoners in the Cave are rescued from their ignorance by the philosopher King.

3. Not the philosopher king ,nor the prisoners, nor any former prisoners are able to view the Sun except through the eyes of faith.

4. The Form of the Good can be argued by moderns, especially perhaps by Buddhists, to correlate with inherent predisposition towards fairness as in distributive justice.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Steve
Could you discuss a Christian idea without ridiculing or condemning your conception of Christianity? A secularist cannot.


Yes. I could. If the inability to do that is the definition of "secularist" then I guess I'm not a secularist. I guess that must be good.

-- Updated Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:07 am to add the following --

Now that we've defined the term "secularist", is there a term for a person who is unable to discuss an atheistic idea (i.e. an idea which omits the concept of god or gods) without ridiculing or condemning it?
A secularist by function is limited to one level of reality. All conceptions of reality for the secularist are limited to what is revealed through the senses. As yet they lack the third dimension of thought which connects levels of reality. Whether they are emotional about their denial or not is strictly a matter of conditioning. As a secularist, could you discuss the following observation without ridicule and open denial? As a believer I have no problem agreeing with the atheist that our existence on earth is limited to the possible.

"It is only the impossible that is possible for God. He has given over the possible to the mechanics of matter and the autonomy of his creatures." - Simone Weil ...
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Steve3007 »

Nick_A:
As a secularist, could you discuss the following observation without ridicule and open denial?
I thought we'd established in post #144 that a secularist is somebody who cannot discuss a Christian idea without ridiculing or condemning it? If so, then the above question could not possibly have a "yes" answer, could it?

So maybe we should skip the "As a secularist..." part and see if I can rise to the challenge you have set me. Then I guess you could make a judgement as to whether I am a secularist, as defined by you in post #144.

Simone Weil:
It is only the impossible that is possible for God. He has given over the possible to the mechanics of matter and the autonomy of his creatures.
I've never seen this statement before so I'll consider it in isolation, without any context that it might have been in.

The first sentence appears to be saying that God can only do impossible things (which for him are possible). i.e. it divides the world into two types of actions: possible ones and impossible ones. Humans can do the former. God can do the latter.

Fair enough.

The second sentence just backs that up. It says that the things which happen and which are describable by physical law (stones rolling down hills and rainbows and such) and things that are done by living creatures are possible.

I can't argue with that!

So, if the existence of God is taken as a premise to the statement, then I have no quarrel with it. Since I have no knowledge whatsoever about this God thing I'm perfectly willing to accept that it can do the impossible if somebody tells me so. So I have no quarrel with either sentence but they don't seem to say anything much. The part about matter and creatures is true by definition of the word "possible" and the part about God is about something I know nothing about, so I have no way to assess its truth or falsehood.

How am I doing?
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Is faith a good way to believe?

Post by Nick_A »

Steve3007 wrote:Nick_A:
As a secularist, could you discuss the following observation without ridicule and open denial?
I thought we'd established in post #144 that a secularist is somebody who cannot discuss a Christian idea without ridiculing or condemning it? If so, then the above question could not possibly have a "yes" answer, could it?

So maybe we should skip the "As a secularist..." part and see if I can rise to the challenge you have set me. Then I guess you could make a judgement as to whether I am a secularist, as defined by you in post #144.

Simone Weil:
It is only the impossible that is possible for God. He has given over the possible to the mechanics of matter and the autonomy of his creatures.
I've never seen this statement before so I'll consider it in isolation, without any context that it might have been in.

The first sentence appears to be saying that God can only do impossible things (which for him are possible). i.e. it divides the world into two types of actions: possible ones and impossible ones. Humans can do the former. God can do the latter.

Fair enough.

The second sentence just backs that up. It says that the things which happen and which are describable by physical law (stones rolling down hills and rainbows and such) and things that are done by living creatures are possible.

I can't argue with that!

So, if the existence of God is taken as a premise to the statement, then I have no quarrel with it. Since I have no knowledge whatsoever about this God thing I'm perfectly willing to accept that it can do the impossible if somebody tells me so. So I have no quarrel with either sentence but they don't seem to say anything much. The part about matter and creatures is true by definition of the word "possible" and the part about God is about something I know nothing about, so I have no way to assess its truth or falsehood.

How am I doing?

In all fairness you are probably not familiar with these types of ideas so they are easy to misunderstand. You cannot condemn a contradiction since you haven’t yet opened to the contradiction.

The world and our universe as we see it is governed by universal laws. Its creatures are also reactions to universal laws. All that is possible, the process of existence, is governed by laws. If that is the case, there is no room for God. Doing the impossible in a universe within which everything is connected by the possible would cause the destruction of the universe since its inner connectedness would fall apart.

So for the secularist limited to one level of reality, this relationship is clearly an absurd contradiction. If I gave the impression that a secularist by definition has to be a raving defender of blind denial, this was wrong. Some can just say “I don’t know” Nothing wrong with that.

One level of reality, Plato’s cave, the domain of the Great Beast, rules the world. The faith OF Christ rather than faith IN Christ is necessary to connect levels of reality and opening the path for conscious evolution and the psychological experience of the triune universe through opening to the third dimension of thought.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021