The Grand Illusion

[Roadtoad]

Just out of curiosity, do you believe that true faith must acknowledge the possibility that God does not exist? In other words, if you're genuinely interested in the truth, can you do so by claiming that God must exist, or is there wiggle room on this?

My own belief is that if you are searching for Truth, you must acknowledge that believing in God could be fruitless, that He may not even exist.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Anyone who claims to care for truth but admits no possibility of error is a liar (and, in keeping with current vogue, probably a racist to boot). The instant one loses all doubt, they cease to care for truth, and care only for their own correctness.

[stamenflicker]

Just out of curiosity, do you believe that true faith must acknowledge the possibility that God does not exist? In other words, if you're genuinely interested in the truth, can you do so by claiming that God must exist, or is there wiggle room on this?

Roadtoad,

I'm a believer and I for sure think one must be open to the possibility, otherwise it just isn't faith. I have found that the depth of my faith is inversely related to the height of my doubt. Those who doubt little have very little to claim as genuine faith-- that is of course my opinion.

Flick

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Roadtoad
... do you believe that true faith must acknowledge the possibility that God does not exist? I think it's implicit in the definition of faith. That is, Nobody knows for sure - but you do because you have faith.

It's like the Bible says: Let him who is without faith cast off his stones and follow me.

I don't remember where that quote is exactly... But I think its in one of the testaments.

[Bruce]

To find Truth, one must search within, and go without.













That's what my fortune cookie says. How about yours?

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Bruce
That's what my fortune cookie says. How about yours?

Nice cookie. Mine only has lottery numbers, and a message that says, "Go f*** yourself."

I need to find a better restaurant.

[Santa666]

Before my conversion to Evil St. Nick, I belonged to the believer crowd, and part of the basic reasoning I was taught to use when speaking with non-believers about god, morality, heaven, hell, etc..... was something along the following lines. Asking the non-believer; blah blah blah, this is how you get to heaven, but even if you believe in god and that jesus died on the cross for you sins, AND you are wrong, at the very worst, you lived a moral and good life, BUT if you are right, you go to heaven, how can you beat that? Point being, many christians leave open the this possibility, and at least where I come from, even use it as part of the coversion tatic.

And last week, my fortune cookie was empty. What do I do with that?

Santa (breaking into homes every christmas eve) Clause

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Roadtoad
My own belief is that if you are searching for Truth, you must acknowledge that believing in God could be fruitless, that He may not even exist. Yes, absolutely.

[Skeptical Greg]

I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.

If someone claims to believe in God, but consder the possibility that it may not exist, are admitting they don't really believe.. Sounds more like ' hope '..

[roger]

I'm sort of with Diogenes.

Thing is, I really have no concept of what mental state, feeling, thought, whatever people are describing when they mention faith. So far as I know, it is not part of my experience. Oh, I assume many a thing that hasn't been proven, and I have my blind spots (thinking something is true when it isn't), but faith just doesn't seem to be part of my experience.

Given that, I find it impossible to answer Roadtoad's question.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Diogenes
I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.

If someone claims to believe in God, but consder the possibility that it may not exist, are admitting they don't really believe.. Sounds more like ' hope '.. Do you believe (i.e., hope) that the sun shines tomorrow?

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by Santa666
And last week, my fortune cookie was empty. What do I do with that?

It was a homeopathic fortune. Those are the most powerful ones... it's sure to come true!



Originally posted by Diogenes
I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.


Really? If someone a few years from now came up with a TOE that explained what we have come to know as electricity and light better than our current theories of electromagnetism, et al, said "electrons" and "photons" were not real, they were really just "X", and it was better supported by evidence than our current theories, you'd still cling to the old ones? I'm not saying this is likely, but hey- it happened to Newton, right?

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by Iacchus
Do you believe (i.e., hope) that the sun shines tomorrow?

I don't hope, I know. The sacrifice I made of my neighbor's rotweiller to Quetzelcouatl insured it.


You're welcome.

[Gestahl]

Originally posted by Diogenes
I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.

If someone claims to believe in God, but consder the possibility that it may not exist, are admitting they don't really believe.. Sounds more like ' hope '..

This is not the same, Diogenes. These are repeatable physical effects.

Consider the question of whether black holes exist. For a while, it was not known how one might go about looking for one, and no observational evidence was to be found.

Now, I can doubt that they exist, because GR may be incomplete, but by its many successes, there is a very good chance they do. However, I have no evidence. Therefore, I doubt their existence (and like a good scientist, even doubt the preliminary data lending support to observation), but still believe they exist, and have faith that evidence will be uncovered.

Likewise, a theist may believe God exists, but still hold the possibility that he could not. Similarly, I can have faith that my (hypothetical) wife will not cheat on me, as evidenced by many year of it not happening and our vows, but that is tempered by the fact that I rationally know that it could happen. In fact, I would go so far as to say one can only have faith on an issue in which one acknowledges the possibility of the opposite being the case. If there is no possibility for error, it's fact, and requires no belief and no faith.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by Iacchus
Do you believe (i.e., hope) that the sun shines tomorrow? I hope that it will. I believe in the processes that make it likely.

[Atlas]

Originally posted by roger
I'm sort of with Diogenes.

Thing is, I really have no concept of what mental state, feeling, thought, whatever people are describing when they mention faith. So far as I know, it is not part of my experience. Oh, I assume many a thing that hasn't been proven, and I have my blind spots (thinking something is true when it isn't), but faith just doesn't seem to be part of my experience. I don't think "faith" is an intellectual experience. It's something you "know" in your gut.

By example, one might say: "I know Mary loves me." Hey Mary says she does and sometimes acts as if she does but she could be Anna Nicole Smith, golddigger. There is no way to know but who has not been blinded by the love they feel.

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by Atlas
I don't think "faith" is an intellectual experience. It's something you "know" in your gut.


The way Hinkley "knew" that Jodie Foster would fall in love with him if he just got her attention?

[roger]

Originally posted by Atlas
I don't think "faith" is an intellectual experience. It's something you "know" in your gut.

By example, one might say: "I know Mary loves me." Hey Mary says she does and sometimes acts as if she does but she could be Anna Nicole Smith, golddigger. There is no way to know but who has not been blinded by the love they feel.
I can't say I've ever had that experience.

If your statement is true, then I don't understand why religious leaders argue that you need to have faith. Their argument assumes conscious choice, whereas your's seems quite uncontrolled.

I may be reading you wrong. I liken what you wrote to love - I feel love for people, but don't reason it out and decide "yes, they have all the required qualities for me to love them, therefore I will love them".

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Piscivore
The way Hinkley "knew" that Jodie Foster would fall in love with him if he just got her attention? Very similar. Something that would make you so happy if it were true and something that engenders feelings so utterly undeniable that they just have to be true. We substitute the undeniabilty of the feeling for the undeniability of the reality we allow those feelings to suggest.

[Atlas]

Originally posted by roger
... If your statement is true, then I don't understand why religious leaders argue that you need to have faith. Their argument assumes conscious choice, whereas your's seems quite uncontrolled.

I may be reading you wrong. I liken what you wrote to love - I feel love for people, but don't reason it out and decide "yes, they have all the required qualities for me to love them, therefore I will love them". Yes, likening it to love is what I intended. I agree that few ever reason about those they love. There is not much reason can help with. If you feel hunger, reasoning about it won't make it go away. Same with love. But love can be reciprocated. And it can take other forms. You can love a person or a dog or a shiny locket your mama gave you.

I say that to get at your first point above. Why do religious leaders argue that you need to have faith. All the forms of love I mention could be assigned to felt measures of preciousness. Each could be given a different word descriptor than love. The word would not change you feeling of dearness.

But by shifting words one can shift meaning. One can denigrate the feeling you might have for a dog if you compare it to the feeling you might have for your mother or lover. One might even be able to designate the feeling you have for the locket as greed and separate you from it.

Faith takes on a loftiness that other forms of "not knowing" do not. Faith sounds stronger that Wish. I believe that words can be used not only to describe feelings but also to generate them. If you can convince a listener that the good feelings they have about the beautiful world are manifestations of a truth behind reality and name it "faith" you can manipulate the person's feelings in later conversations invoking that shorthand term. The more it is used the more real it becomes and gets closely asociated with a particular emotional state. Likewise, faith can be achieved not through the manipulation of feelings of light and joy, but through feelings of fear and death and hell. It's pretty easy to guess at the source of a person's faith in a short conversation with them.

My point concerns human emotional states and the words we choose to describe them. Religious and political leaders manipulate the masses by skillful manipulation of power words that mean something slightly different to each individual but can be used to create emotional states.

People are not driven to act by idea nearly to the extent they are diven by the hungers, yearnings and emotions that are the blood and guts of human existence.

[Skeptical Greg]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Diogenes
I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Piscivore
Really? If someone a few years from now came up with a TOE that explained what we have come to know as electricity and light better than our current theories of electromagnetism, et al, said "electrons" and "photons" were not real, they were really just "X", and it was better supported by evidence than our current theories, you'd still cling to the old ones? I'm not saying this is likely, but hey- it happened to Newton, right? You are really talking about two different things.

I didn't say I would continue to believe in the light of contrary evidence.

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by Diogenes
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Diogenes
I believe in electricity, gravity, light & etc..

I do not consider the possibility that they do not exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are really talking about two different things.

I didn't say I would continue to believe in the light of contrary evidence.

I gotcha. You meant the observed effects the theories describe, not the theories named as such. Yeah, I misunderstood.

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Most people have an image of how they look to the world, you see yourself in the mirror everyday but when you are away from the mirror do you really have to consider the possibility that you may look like a three headed toad, as well as having the belief that you look like the person you last saw in the mirror. I don't see why, having a belief just means that all other possibilities just fade into the background even if they are still there you don't really have to think about them do you, without a good reason?

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Piscivore
I don't hope, I know. The sacrifice I made of my neighbor's rotweiller to Quetzelcouatl insured it.

You're welcome. Yeah, but what if there was some glitch in God's computer, and it all just winked out all of a sudden?

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Originally posted by Iacchus
Yeah, but what if there was some glitch in God's computer, and it all just winked out all of a sudden?


you don't even have to have glitches, a deadly black hole might sweep into the solar system and swallow up the sun leaving us in orbit around a black hole.......

[stamenflicker]

Diogenes,

If someone claims to believe in God, but consder the possibility that it may not exist, are admitting they don't really believe.. Sounds more like ' hope '..

I think hope is a good word, but I might couple it with the word "trust." Short of the simple (but fundamental) existence question, the word trust better captures a relationship with the belief or hope. So faith might be the trust-hope in item X.

I have faith in my wife's fidelity-- maybe even in moments of great doubt. It is a hope and a trust that she remains true to her vows.

I've made this analogy before, but the "economy" is a similar analogy for faith. I'm not talking about an economic crash or anything like that, but rather the reality that you keep a quarter in your pocket at all. We real-ify the ideal (and unverifiable) economy every day we operate within its functionality.

The "economy" is an ideology that human beings have attached themselves to in very practical, even necessary ways. But to say an economy (noun) really exists outside of its function is a pretty silly question and we would probably in intellectual honesty say the economy itself does not exist in any real terms. There isn't really a logical basis to except the law of supply and demand other than, "That's just the way it is" in Capitalism.

Hence, the properties of item X are more tied to their function than to their actual reality, which is why I tend not to fret too much over actuality in theological doubt. I tend to return a degree of trust (or faith) to the function, and that at many levels is enough for me; however I would be lying if I said I didn't also attach that trust to a literal God, however intellectually displeasing the concept may seem at times.

Flick

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Iacchus
Yeah, but what if there was some glitch in God's computer, and it all just winked out all of a sudden? That would be evidence for your position but strangely not good evidence. If it all winked out we'd all be dead and it's quite likely both heaven and hell would wink off too without God's computer to keep them lit.

And once again your faith in your "truth" would be shown equal to the atheist's non belief in the illusion you hold dear.

[Bearguin]

Originally posted by Roadtoad
Nice cookie. Mine only has lottery numbers,

You need to watch this if the restaurant also sells lottery tickets........

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Atlas
That would be evidence for your position but strangely not good evidence. If it all winked out we'd all be dead and it's quite likely both heaven and hell would wink off too without God's computer to keep them lit.

And once again your faith in your "truth" would be shown equal to the atheist's non belief in the illusion you hold dear. I see, it's all relative huh? ... Yeah, but relative to what? Could it be that we are in fact speaking of the same reality, just different aspects of it?

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Iacchus
I see, it's all relative huh? ... Yeah, but relative to what? Could it be that we are in fact speaking of the same reality, just different aspects of it? I didn't say anything about "relative". So this may be a classic Iacchus shift. I generally like folks who love to play with words. They can be poets like Mercutio. But I like wordplay that leads somewhere. It's ok for it to lead to humorland as long as I'm in on the joke. I hope it doesn't lead to the wasteland.

I think we both marvel at the world and who man is in it, Iacchus. But the aspect that I marvel most at is Man's real world accomplishments. And his artistic and scientific achievements in the objective world he finds himself in. In my reality man transcends by his own intellectual and emotional lights. If he refers to God he is really harnessing his own energies, just like he does when he refers to strength, anger, idea and ideals, love...

You diminish man. Everything is a dream. Achievments are dream. God is what is real - God and the illusion of the world.

You asked, Could it be that we are in fact speaking of the same reality, just different aspects of it? Maybe - but it doesn't seem like it.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Atlas
I didn't say anything about "relative". So this may be a classic Iacchus shift.So what exactly did you mean by, "your faith in your truth?" Or, perhaps you just don't realize what you're saying?

I think we both marvel at the world and who man is in it, Iacchus. But the aspect that I marvel most at is Man's real world accomplishments. And his artistic and scientific achievements in the objective world he finds himself in. In my reality man transcends by his own intellectual and emotional lights. If he refers to God he is really harnessing his own energies, just like he does when he refers to strength, anger, idea and ideals, love...Ah well, yes, if in fact this was all there is. While I find it funny how when you folks start claiming there is no ultimate meaning to the Universe -- how could it, if it all just appeared at random? -- that you take yourselves way too seriously. And then turn around and try to make it look like it's all my probelm. What a joke!

You diminish man. Everything is a dream. Achievments are dream. God is what is real - God and the illusion of the world. I don't view the world as an illusion, just a lower "plane" of existence.

You asked, Could it be that we are in fact speaking of the same reality, just different aspects of it? Maybe - but it doesn't seem like it. I do make allowances for you and "your" world believe it or not.

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Iacchus
So what exactly did you mean by, "your faith in your truth?" Or, perhaps you just don't realize what you're saying?
Ok, I see the error. By emphasizing the wrong word you end up with a misquote which can be misconstrued. I said your faith in your "truth". Think of it as more cynical than relative.Ah well, yes, if in fact this was all there is. There is no evidence otherwise though Randi is looking so we should stay tuned.While I find it funny how when you folks start claiming there is no ultimate meaning to the Universe -- how could it, if it all just appeared at random? -- that you take yourselves way too seriously. And then turn around and try to make it look like it's all my probelm. What a joke!Ultimate meaning is something we'll never know. The Universe is so huge and we are at the farthest corner. From our vantage ultimate meaning is complete conjecture. Your problem is that you refuse to accept that - though you know it's true. Or can you tell us today what the ultimate meaning of the universe is? Who's joking who here?I don't view the world as an illusion, just a lower "plane" of existence.

I do make allowances for you and "your" world believe it or not. I anticipated this reply with my accusation that: You diminish Man. We're lower forms on a lower plane. You got this from religion. We are sinful vile creatures. And you make allowances - Geez Iacchus. Your thinking is infected this way. If you had some esteem in your measure you would see yourself and us and our world much more positively.

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Come on boys, lets not argue.

lets have a singsong.

[Atlas]

Originally posted by DuckTapeFileMan
Come on boys, lets not argue.

lets have a singsong. I won't be able to follow. I never learned the words to Kumbaya.

That's probably my whole problem.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Atlas
Ok, I see the error. By emphasizing the wrong word you end up with a misquote which can be misconstrued. I said your faith in your "truth". Think of it as more cynical than relative.Oh, I understood the cynicism here. Why do you think I was trying to toss your own "relativistic" views back in your face?

There is no evidence otherwise though Randi is looking so we should stay tuned.In other words it requires someone else to point it out to you. Correct? Isn't this the same problem we have with The Church? Indeed, how would we know, if it wasn't ascertainable for oneself?

Ultimate meaning is something we'll never know. The Universe is so huge and we are at the farthest corner. From our vantage ultimate meaning is complete conjecture. Your problem is that you refuse to accept that - though you know it's true. Or can you tell us today what the ultimate meaning of the universe is? Who's joking who here?You don't believe the Universe is chock of meaning and, entails an ultimate design? Well, I guess that doesn't leave us much to wonder about now does it? ;)

I anticipated this reply with my accusation that: You diminish Man. We're lower forms on a lower plane. You got this from religion. We are sinful vile creatures. And you make allowances - Geez Iacchus. Your thinking is infected this way. If you had some esteem in your measure you would see yourself and us and our world much more positively. Do caterpillars have sex? I'm a spiritist ... not a Bible thumper.

[Robin]

Originally posted by Iacchus
[You don't believe the Universe is chock of meaning and, entails an ultimate design? Well, I guess that doesn't leave us much to wonder about now does it? ;)

It leaves us with just about everything to wonder about.

[Robin]

Originally posted by stamenflicker
I tend to return a degree of trust (or faith) to the function, and that at many levels is enough for me...
That is an intriguing statement - do you mean the function of religion in the world generally or is it how religion operates in your own life?

[Ladewig]

May I respectfully request that in the future, you write more descriptive titles so that people with slow connections can decide whether or not to open threads.

Also, more descriptive thread titles allow people who want to follow the thread to find it more easily.

[stamenflicker]

Robin,

That is an intriguing statement - do you mean the function of religion in the world generally or is it how religion operates in your own life?

Practically speaking I mean how it operates in my life and those in my immediate surroundings. Ideally speaking, religion (most forms of it anyway) could function in a trustworthy manner at a general human level, but that's not reality.

Flick

[Dr Adequate]

Originally posted by stamenflicker
I have faith in my wife's fidelity-- maybe even in moments of great doubt. It is a hope and a trust that she remains true to her vows. At least you know your wife exists. Suppose that you had to believe on trust, not just that your wife was faithful, but suppose that you had a good recollection of your whole life, and that you had no recollection even of being married, and that no-one could show you the woman who was meant to be your wife, or even show you a picture of her: then could you believe, despite your own memories, that you really were married and had a wife and that she was faithful --- on the basis of "hope and trust" alone. Could you do that?

If I believed that there was a God, I should certainly trust him. I would trust my wife --- if I believed I had one. But I am single and I can find no God in the world I live in.

"Being hungry does not prove that we have bread."

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Dr Adequate
At least you know your wife exists. Yeah, at least you're conscious, and capable of believing in something.

[stamenflicker]

Dr. A,

If I believed that there was a God, I should certainly trust him. I would trust my wife --- if I believed I had one. But I am single and I can find no God in the world I live in.

But then we are both answering our own questions aren't we? I like the quote and I can't remember who said it:

"For the one with faith, no explaination is necessary; to the one without faith, no explaination is possible."

Flick

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Originally posted by Roadtoad
Just out of curiosity, do you believe that true faith must acknowledge the possibility that God does not exist? In other words, if you're genuinely interested in the truth, can you do so by claiming that God must exist, or is there wiggle room on this?

My own belief is that if you are searching for Truth, you must acknowledge that believing in God could be fruitless, that He may not even exist.


True Faith is that nothing, not even mountains of reality will shake you from your belief.

If one is interested in the truth, faith is a piss poor way to go about it. Sure, a few can luck-out into happening to have faith in what's real; like a few people do win the $70,000,000 multi-state lotteries. Most loose though. Faith isn't based on anything more than you wish it were true.

"Faith" is shorthand for being stupid enough to believe what you hope is true, is true-Me