In order to even
begin to discuss the idea of faith and what it means we have to define it
totally and definitely. The English word of faith just means you have a strong conviction, one way or the other, on a particular idea/person/entity. A more realistic understanding of the word and the idea that it represents, at least currently, is similar but is more specific. Faith is the belief in a concept that has zero proof
at all, not only that, but the idea Requires there is no proof of concept in
order for the term "faith" to be applied. We do not have "faith" that the Sun will rise in the morning, we simply know, based upon our understanding of the universe, that it is simply a irrefutable logical conclusion.
How is this
concept even remotely accepted? I would understand if a small minority who were
badly educated believed in this concept, but for the majority of our species to
believe in it makes no sense.
To believe in
something, without any logical reason to, is mind boggling. What is even more
mind boggling, is that this idea is accepted as common practice. If we applied
the idea of faith to everyday life we would be completely and totally
incapable, as a species, to achieve anything at all. We live our lives, or at
least should, by making the most statistically accurate choices as possible, ie
we only make decisions on the basis that it has more chance of affecting us positively
than negatively.
Faith, by
definition, is taking a complete gamble on every choice. We see no evidence, we
have no idea if it is the right choice, but we make the "leap of
faith" dependant on our own unsubstantiated concept of the "right"
choice. If there was ANY proof at ALL we would no longer be using faith but, rather, reason. Faith is intrinsically uncertain in nature.
So if we look at
faith objectively, we will see that it is impossible to impact positively on
our world, and I would say, by the same logic, it could not impact negatively on our world. Faith is however an example of an extremest belief system, which at its core, in almost any form, impacts very negatively on us as a society. So the only outcome for Faith to have is a small negative to a large negative effect, which I would say is clearly self-evident in the world today. We cannot therefore ever move forward, as a species,
in an overall positive fashion, if the majority of us are faithful to a certain
belief.
Your argument fails at this point:
ReplyDelete"Faith is the belief in a concept that has zero proof at all, not only that, but the idea Requires there is no proof of concept in order for the term "faith" to be applied."
What is the difference between “1” and “0?”
It’s an easy enough question and with a little thought you may come to the conclusion that the difference is existence. Zero implies that the proof does not exist while 1, whether 1/100, 1/1000 or 1/infinity, implies that it does exist. Your argument is good except the above quote where you go from a very reasonable definition to hyperbole.
First, steering clear of religion, imagine an amateur gambler. He wakes up one morning and he can’t get the word “sunny” out of his head. He scours the dog tracks and the horse track for some race where one of the animals has a name that compliments the word “sunny.” He finds one and he places a bet. This is faith. It is belief or direction with an action. All faith requires is that some part of the equation be unknown and the individual to take action regardless.
Second, the reality in which we live is uncertain. I could bet that time would stop and that people all of sudden could fly. It could happen. An incredibly heavy mass could theoretically accomplish both of these things at different velocities. One is a black hole and a relative observer and the other happens whenever an individual is caught in a blast wave. Whatever you think of there is a possibility that it could happen due to unknown externalities. At the same time there is always a possibility that someone may foresee it and act accordingly to it.
Thirdly, the power of zero is amazing. In order for zero to be applied all other possibilities must be falsified. If you review your science you will find that in a complex world we usually speak and act according to probability. When we talk in certainties we must distill and reduce the equation to such a point that we can confidently say there are no externalities.
Lastly, faith as you describe it requires that you falsify everything else. Unfortunately, that’s impossible and consequently ironic on your part. Because the faith you deride is the same faith that you use to believe it does not exist. You can no more disprove their faith in whatever, than they can disprove your faith in the nonexistence of what they chose to have faith in. You can only play the numbers and use probability to say that the outcome of their faith is very (insert astronomically here if you like) unlikely. If this were not so, then you would always be able to tell the future by telling me whose faith was misplaced and we could bet on the only alternative left. Ahhh, but wait, in many instances the alternatives are infinite.
I enjoyed your writing and hope you continue.
Respectfully,
Eric Lake
Hi Eric,
DeleteSorry I have not replied to you sooner. I would have to agree with your assessment although I think my point still stands (as you say could just be an astronomically small chance). I really appreciate your response and it is probably better written than my blog. I will keep writing although I haven't done anything for a while. I also want to write on things that really make sense to me as opposed to writing just for the sake of it.
Anyway thanks again for posting such a well structured response, I hope you review the accuracy of any further posts of mine.
Regards,
Nick