Faith: What's the big deal?

[Acriku]

I want to give a general question out to the people who cherish this trait and find it to have some meaning: what is the big deal of having faith?

Here is the definition at dictionary.com:

Faith (n):

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

If you agree with this definition, then please answer the question.

If you don't agree with this definition, then you are probably speaking of a different 'faith' and it'd be nice to provide a definition you can agree with that is relevant to you.

[chatfsh]

Are you simply referring to the religious aspects of

[GUNWOUNDS]

I want to give a general question out to the people who cherish this trait and find it to have some meaning: what is the big deal of having faith?

Here is the definition at dictionary.com:

Faith (n):

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

If you agree with this definition, then please answer the question.

If you don't agree with this definition, then you are probably speaking of a different 'faith' and it'd be nice to provide a definition you can agree with that is relevant to you.

For me i equate it to...

Trust - assured reliance

Confidence - a feeling or consciousness of one's powers (yours or theirs)

Hope -  to desire with expectation of obtainment

I'll use Chatfsh's monogamy example......

What's the Big Deal?  Well its not so much a Big Deal as it is lack of anything else to call it.  To acknwoledge belief in an entity that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence you must use other phrases or words such as ... "have confidence in" , "trust in" , or "hope for/that".  Lets say that i am trying to acknowledge belief in such an entity... lets use an aspect of human love such as "the monogamy of my wife".  I have faith that my wife is monogamous to me.  I am confident that my wife is monogamous. I trust that my wife is monogamous to me, I hope my wife is monogamous to me.  But i cant logically proof that she is monogamous to me as humans are deceptive and i cant materially prove that she is monogamous to me as i am not with her every second.  So i have to use the word "faith" if i am to acknowledge the entity in this case...which is my wife's mongamy. The entity could exist or not exist.  Hence Faith, (not proven fact) is what must be used here as terminology to acknowledge this particular entity (my wife's mongamy).  Of course we all have our reasons to believe what we believe... you may interpret certain hints (true or false ones) from your wife that would lead you to believe she is or isnt faithful, but its hardly a proven fact (they could be deceitful hints, correctly understood hints, or misconstrued hints).  Same with metaphysical beliefs ... we may pick up hints from the universe that makes us believe that the metaphysical may or may not exist, again hardly a proven fact.

You could also replace "the mongamy of my wife" with  "am i in the matrix" for another non-supernatural example.

Also check this thread for an example of faith and logic---> http://dune2k.com/forum/index.php?topic=18142.msg291593#msg291593

Guns

[Acriku]

Right guns, but what I was getting at was why are people making such a big deal about the act of having faith? They seem to view having faith itself being a virtue. I am confused as to what the big deal is there. Is there some arguable inherent quality in having faith in a deity, or what?

[Darth Kwisatz]

I'd reckon it's more of a social identifier for people of like mind. An unsympathetic person would suggest it gives rise to the opportunity to feel social/moral superiority too, and that could be said of people with a low self-esteem or low and ungenerous quality of faith.

The big deal about faith, I think, comes down to proselytising. Why is the spread of faith important to those who have it? Is it just a social/hierarchical/political/economic/military numbers game? Why are theistic creeds built around propogation?

[Egeides]

Faith: Belief in some overall picture based on the available pattern, despite not having every single piece of it.

If we don't stick to theology, one could have faith that his girlfriend loves him. Or have faith that the sun will rise as the days before.

Acriku, do you have faith from empirical experience in things like that the sun will rise?

If yes, would you say that my faith is irrational if it is based empirically as well?

[Acriku]

I don't have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, I have very good reason to think that the sun will rise tomorrow based on millenia of successful rises.

Again, this isn't about just having faith. This is about thinking that having faith is a virtue or has some intrinsic value. I don't get why people find it so great to be able to believe in something that has no evidence for it.

[Egeides]

You might be saying the same with different terms. Faith is not some absolute knowledge on sun rises :P

Faith doesn't give knowledge about every single variable of the universe. And I see an intrinsic value in the sense that searching for truth has.

Many see an intrinsic value in science, or art, or else without really looking further. They simplify it alot and just go on with life. The same happens with faith.

[Acriku]

You might be saying the same with different terms. Faith is not some absolute knowledge on sun rises :P

Faith doesn't give knowledge about every single variable of the universe. And I see an intrinsic value in the sense that searching for truth has.

Many see an intrinsic value in science, or art, or else without really looking further. They simplify it alot and just go on with life. The same happens with faith.

So there is no intrinsic value in faith? If so, then I agree. If not, please elaborate.

As for those who do think there is an intrinsic value in faith, tell me so I'm not confused anymore  :(

[Egeides]

I give value in searching for truth, and so I give value in faith. Humans don't know everything, and do not need to have confidence in their girl/boyfriends' love, gravity, or else. Everything goes that way for them: they evaluate wordly information by wordly ways. The presence of the universal goes as for the presence of the humans.

[Acriku]

I give value in searching for truth, and so I give value in faith. Humans don't know everything, and do not need to have confidence in their girl/boyfriends' love, gravity, or else. Everything goes that way for them: they evaluate wordly information by wordly ways. The presence of the universal goes as for the presence of the humans.

Seriously, have you been having conversations with Caid? You're not very coherent here...

[Darth Kwisatz]

I think faith is the abandonment of the search for truth and of curiosity as well. Isn't faith the feeling that you've found truth already? Aren't life's inexplicables merely sacred, inscrutable mysteries to the faithful that are beyond human comprehension?

[Egeides]

Seriously, have you been having conversations with Caid? You're not very coherent here...

Do not just claim the incoherence but please show it. If you expect an a priori rational plan from "faith", I think that it is wrong; if you expect a correct stance towards life and knowledge, it might fit better. What is claimed as "faith" all over the world often seem like a less "sophisticated" version, and the same phenomenon goes for "rationality" (or religion and science).

Caid might think the same or not. If you wish, I guess I'd say I'm from:

God not being irrational and rationality not concluding by default - seeing cartesian discrepancies in forming a "complete rationality" - figuring that we go from what we have and belief as not just non-theological - and looking at "map of knowledge" to take a more precise stance.

It doesn't get more rational-based Acriku... while belief in searching truth was the base to advance further ;)

[GUNWOUNDS]

I think faith is the abandonment of the search for truth and of curiosity as well. Isn't faith the feeling that you've found truth already? Aren't life's inexplicables merely sacred, inscrutable mysteries to the faithful that are beyond human comprehension?

Riiiiiight,  faith removes all truth and curiosity the same way it removes it from world renowned Biochemist Michael Behe who is a devout Christian.  Yea i am sure he has no curiosity or search for truth.  Actually he states he is very curious, the only difference between him and his atheistic scientist counterparts is that when he discovers something he says "Oh so thats how God did it!",  while the others do not.  Faith in no way squashes curiosity or search for truth...else there would be no christians in any science field.

So there is no intrinsic value in faith? If so, then I agree. If not, please elaborate.

As for those who do think there is an intrinsic value in faith, tell me so I'm not confused anymore  :(

I believe that faith is important (i.e. has value) because if you dont have faith in aforementioned non-provable entities you are in fact REJECTING them.  If i have no faith in my wife's monogamy ... I'm rejecting her and basically insulting her.  If i have no faith in God then i am in fact rejecting Him.

Seriously, have you been having conversations with Caid? You're not very coherent here...

Egeides post wasnt entirely incoherent.... he was stating that if faith is good enough to use on humanly daily events such as trusting your girlfriend or boyfriend, then its just as good for the metaphysical.

[Acriku]

I believe that faith is important (i.e. has value) because if you dont have faith in aforementioned non-provable entities you are in fact REJECTING them.  If i have no faith in my wife's monogamy ... I'm rejecting her and basically insulting her.  If i have no faith in God then i am in fact rejecting Him.

I guess this is true because of how the Bible sets it up that way.

Egeides post wasnt entirely incoherent.... he was stating that if faith is good enough to use on humanly daily events such as trusting your girlfriend or boyfriend, then its just as good for the metaphysical.

There's a huge difference between having faith that your girlfriend who has thus far been faithful will remain faithful and having faith that some obscure being in the sky exists that made everything and had once talked to Moses.It's not entirely faith when we have prior evidence to establish a precedence, just like the sun coming up every morning.

[GUNWOUNDS]

I guess this is true because of how the Bible sets it up that way.

There's a huge difference between having faith that your girlfriend who has thus far been faithful will remain faithful and having faith that some obscure being in the sky exists that made everything and had once talked to Moses.It's not entirely faith when we have prior evidence to establish a precedence, just like the sun coming up every morning.

we have to separate the events tho.  Trusting a  loved one is not equal to the sun rising.  The sun rising has prior evidence.  We have no prior evidence that your spouse is faithful.  She could be banging all your friends every other day on her lunch break and you'd never know.  Some things you just have to accept as being true without actually having proof or you wouldn't be able to get on with your daily life.

The part about Moses is whether you trust Eye witness testimony.  It is used in a court of law, and jurors consider it.  So you basically trust your gut instinct about the universe around you (we're a bunch of decaying meatbags on a rock in the middle of nowhere with rare form of consciousness, wtf?), trust eye witness testimony (people with integrity chronicling events), then mix in some analysis of your own humanity (what is this consciousness that I have?, why do i feel the way i do?, consider spirituality (is there something more than this?, what about near death experiences?, do i feel touched by God?, Do i feel a presence?, Do i feel alone?)  Eventually you will get to the point where you have strong convictions, no convictions, or somewhere inbetween.  Slap the word faith on it (if you have "it").  And away you go, off into the world to experience life until it ends.

Guns

[Darth Kwisatz]

Riiiiiight,  faith removes all truth and curiosity the same way it removes it from world renowned Biochemist Michael Behe who is a devout Christian.  Yea i am sure he has no curiosity or search for truth.  Actually he states he is very curious, the only difference between him and his atheistic scientist counterparts is that when he discovers something he says "Oh so thats how God did it!",  while the others do not.  Faith in no way squashes curiosity or search for truth...else there would be no christians in any science field.

I believe that faith is important (i.e. has value) because if you dont have faith in aforementioned non-provable entities you are in fact REJECTING them.  If i have no faith in my wife's monogamy ... I'm rejecting her and basically insulting her.  If i have no faith in God then i am in fact rejecting Him.

Egeides post wasnt entirely incoherent.... he was stating that if faith is good enough to use on humanly daily events such as trusting your girlfriend or boyfriend, then its just as good for the metaphysical.

Science is concerned with the testing of hypotheses as its premise to establish facts as its conclusion. Facts and truth are entirely different except in mathematics. Using facts as apologia for myths doesn't quash in any way the extinguishing of curiosity and search for truth as is rendered by faith. If your scientist can demonstrate a link between god and biology, using facts instead of assumptions, it'd make an interesting read.

Faithlessness = rejection? Fair enough, but who's an insecure boy then?

[Acriku]

we have to separate the events tho.  Trusting a  loved one is not equal to the sun rising.  The sun rising has prior evidence.  We have no prior evidence that your spouse is faithful.  She could be banging all your friends every other day on her lunch break and you'd never know.  Some things you just have to accept as being true without actually having proof or you wouldn't be able to get on with your daily life.

While there is an implied (or direct if you talk about this subject) agreement between a boyfriend and a girlfriend to be exclusively dating, you're right you never know. I would rather call it hope than faith, but that's semantics.

The part about Moses is whether you trust Eye witness testimony.  It is used in a court of law, and jurors consider it.  So you basically trust your gut instinct about the universe around you (we're a bunch of decaying meatbags on a rock in the middle of nowhere with rare form of consciousness, wtf?), trust eye witness testimony (people with integrity chronicling events), then mix in some analysis of your own humanity (what is this consciousness that I have?, why do i feel the way i do?, consider spirituality (is there something more than this?, what about near death experiences?, do i feel touched by God?, Do i feel a presence?, Do i feel alone?)  Eventually you will get to the point where you have strong convictions, no convictions, or somewhere inbetween.  Slap the word faith on it (if you have "it").  And away you go, off into the world to experience life until it ends.

Guns

Um, eyewitness testimony is giving way too much credit to the validity of the documents. First of all, those stories were handed down orally, by mouth, and then they were written, re-written, and re-written some more until every single document we have now is merely a copy of dozens or hundreds of copies made from the original. Hardly what court testimony is.

[Edric O]

Darth Kwisatz, is curiosity a virtue? If so, why? Does scientific inquiry - or knowledge itself - have any intrinsic value? If so, why?

I am an extremely curious person and I love knowledge, but I do not believe curiosity is a virtue and I do not think knowledge has any value in and of itself.

Again, this isn't about just having faith. This is about thinking that having faith is a virtue or has some intrinsic value. I don't get why people find it so great to be able to believe in something that has no evidence for it.

Faith is closely related to such things as courage, trust and love, which are widely recognized as virtues. Did you notice how the very first non-supernatural examples of faith given by people on this forum were about faith in their loved ones? If someone makes you a promise and you have faith in them to keep their promise, that is a sign of trust - or perhaps even love. It is also a sign of courage on your part.

If you are wondering why God makes such a big deal about faith, it is because faith is the only thing which can ensure that people follow God for the right reasons. If God did not require faith - if He gave prositive proof of His existence - then everyone would follow Him. There would be no difference between the behaviour of good and evil people. The good people would follow God because it is the right thing to do, but the evil people would also follow Him for their own selfish reasons or simply out of fear. The only way to avoid that is to introduce an element of uncertainty, and bring faith into the picture.

[Acriku]

Ok Edric, fair enough. Now let me throw this one at you: If faith is a sign of trust, how far does that trust go? If there were instructions on when to kill somebody in the Bible, would you trust that God knows what he is doing and if the situation came up kill somebody under those conditions? Obviously, some people do and have. Which is another reason why I think faith is more of a danger than a real virtue, as it can easily be used to make you do something you wouldn't normally do.

[Edric O]

Of course faith can make you do something that you wouldn't normally do. That's the whole point of it all. What determines what you would "normally" do? Usually, it's the collection of stereotypes, prejudice, moral values and "common sense" associated with your culture. Your particular cultural indoctrination as an early 21st century Euro-American involves a powerful taboo on killing for any reason. The members of most other cultures that have existed before the modern age, including older versions of European culture, would consider you insanely pacifistic. The idea that killing can never be justified - not even by a noble cause - would seem absurd to the majority of people who have lived in the past (and possibly even to the majority of people who live today).

Faith liberates you from cultural norms. Yes, it makes you do things that people in your culture wouldn't normally do, but that's one of its most important positive features, not a flaw.

Now, it just so happens that some faiths end up influencing their host cultures (for example, the extreme moral pacifism of Western culture has Christian roots).

You may argue that Western culture is not all that pacifistic, bringing up examples such as Hitler. But we all think that Hitler was evil for slaughtering millions of people in cold blood. In ancient Rome, Julius Caesar was lauded as a hero for slaughtering millions of people (specifically, Gauls) in cold blood. See the difference? Western culture exhibits extreme moral pacifism: we still kill each other and wage wars, but we believe that such things are bad (which, by historical standards, is a very unusual belief).

[Acriku]

Of course faith can make you do something that you wouldn't normally do. That's the whole point of it all. What determines what you would "normally" do? Usually, it's the collection of stereotypes, prejudice, moral values and "common sense" associated with your culture. Your particular cultural indoctrination as an early 21st century Euro-American involves a powerful taboo on killing for any reason. The members of most other cultures that have existed before the modern age, including older versions of European culture, would consider you insanely pacifistic. The idea that killing can never be justified - not even by a noble cause - would seem absurd to the majority of people who have lived in the past (and possibly even to the majority of people who live today).

Faith liberates you from cultural norms. Yes, it makes you do things that people in your culture wouldn't normally do, but that's one of its most important positive features, not a flaw.

Now, it just so happens that some faiths end up influencing their host cultures (for example, the extreme moral pacifism of Western culture has Christian roots).

You may argue that Western culture is not all that pacifistic, bringing up examples such as Hitler. But we all think that Hitler was evil for slaughtering millions of people in cold blood. In ancient Rome, Julius Caesar was lauded as a hero for slaughtering millions of people (specifically, Gauls) in cold blood. See the difference? Western culture exhibits extreme moral pacifism: we still kill each other and wage wars, but we believe that such things are bad (which, by historical standards, is a very unusual belief).

Yes, faith liberates you from certain norms. Norms such as mass suicide being frowned upon, such as blowing yourself up in a town square being evil, etc. You see, faith is a dangerous tool. If you take faith on anything written by someone else, you're at the mercy of what they want you to do. You are their tool for their goals. Instead of questioning the things that need to be questioned, taking it on faith is accepting an alternate reality given from the book you read. It's turning your mind off.

[Edric O]

Yes, faith liberates you from certain norms. Norms such as mass suicide being frowned upon, such as blowing yourself up in a town square being evil, etc.

Actually, Christian faith specifically prohibits suicide. But that's not the point. You are arguing from examples; you are saying that some cultural norms are good. That may well be true. But you cannot say that all cultural norms are good, or that something is good or bad simply because your culture approves or disapproves of it.

In other words, some cultural norms may happen to be good, but, as a general rule, cultural norms are arbitrary.

You see, faith is a dangerous tool.

Of course it is. And so is fire. Should we avoid using any form of combustion?

If you take faith on anything written by someone else, you're at the mercy of what they want you to do. You are their tool for their goals. Instead of questioning the things that need to be questioned, taking it on faith is accepting an alternate reality given from the book you read. It's turning your mind off.

Oh please. You know as well as I do that it is impossible to question everything you read. When you read a chemistry textbook detailing a certain experiment, should you try to replicate the experiment in your own home just to make sure the book isn't lying to you?

Yes, there is always a certain risk involved in trusting someone else's words. But human society itself would be impossible without some degree of trust.

[Darth Kwisatz]

Edric you raise a very interesting point, and I have been lazy in my use of the word virtue. Others have written ad nauseam about good/evil versus relativism versus eastern notions of higher effectiveness in another thread, so I won't go through definitions. Each of us has a concept of virtue, however defined or existentialist it is.

Curiosity has its most manifest effect in facilitating the ebb and flow of ideas as the currency of social power. Curiosity kills cats. It can involve risk. It seeks facts and it seeks truth. It facilitates all manner of good and evil. It can be either subversive or liberating. Of itself it is a benign phenomenon. The causes that give rise to it and the effects it produces are the things that are more easily observed and remarked upon.

I'd say curiosity is one of the building blocks of life, an irreducible impulse so inscrutable as to be tracked by the causes and effects around it. I'd throw it into the same category as love, the instinct to reproduce and the instinct to respire. I'd call it an engine of evolution - on a biological level and on a macro-social level too.

Is it a good or bad thing? Its a good thing if you are ignorant and want to learn. Its a bad thing if someone else has it and you have something to hide. Is it an overall good? That depends on one's philosophical view on the value of life and the value of processes. The answer I find is paradoxical, and is therefore a pathway to truth. The nature of truth is a whole other debate, but suffice to say that I find it in paradoxes, not in accepting the word of others as an end point to my questions. The extent to which I trust the word of others is entirely relative to my experience.

[GUNWOUNDS]

Science is concerned with the testing of hypotheses as its premise to establish facts as its conclusion. Facts and truth are entirely different except in mathematics. Using facts as apologia for myths doesn't quash in any way the extinguishing of curiosity and search for truth as is rendered by faith. If your scientist can demonstrate a link between god and biology, using facts instead of assumptions, it'd make an interesting read.

Faithlessness = rejection? Fair enough, but who's an insecure boy then?

You seemed to have missed the boat.  The point was that being a christian and having faith in God does not remove your curiosity of scientific knowledge.  And being a christian who also happens to be a biochemist doesnt mean you try to find biochemical facts that prove God. Listen carefully .....Michael Behe the christian biochemist simply says to himself "oh so that how God did it" , whereas the atheistic scientists say "oh so that how it is".  Both scientists have the same love for science. The atheistic biochemist feels he is unravelling one of Nature's occurences.  The christian biochemist feels that he is unravelling one of Nature's occurences which also happens to be God's handywork.  Its a simple point of view that in no way impacts curiosity or love for knowledge.  I may think that God created the universe but that doesnt mean i dont want to know how it works.  Simple concept really, I'm sure you'll grasp it as soon as you let go of silly stereotypes.

Faithlessness = rejection? Fair enough, but who's an insecure boy then?

He isnt insecure. It not about Him...its about YOU. Its YOUR problem if you dont have faith ....not His.  By not having faith and rejecting Him you ultimately form yourself into a spiritual configuration not compatible with Him, rendering yourself an object to become isolated from Him which in turn becomes your own self-inflicted suffering.  Faith isnt for Him... its for you.  I'm amazed at how many atheists are such backward thinkers when it comes to God.  I dont mean that as an insult... i mean that you truly do think in reverse of what really makes sense in terms of a relationship between mortal and deity.