I'm confused.

I maintain that a lack of belief is not a belief in itself, or faith, unless you're talking about the faith that you actually know what you yourself do and don't believe. If we don't know that, then really there's no point talking about beliefs or knowledge at all!

Faith (as in confidence) I take as assuming something, based on good evidence, that it is likely to be true. So I have faith the world will be here tomorrow, and my actions reflect my faith in that belief.

Am I getting close?

So you interpret countless hours of conversation concerning flaws on a faith position that governs alot of peoples worldviews to be not starting the conversation... and thus a faith position?
I'm not even sure what the relation between the first part concerning that book on neuroscience and this notion is. Alright, the human mind is capable of imagining things that less intelligent animals cannot... so? How does that backup your position?

Also you "believe" its a construct of the third? So he doesn't actually say it is, does he. Thats something you've added on. Even if this is the case it would seem a mistake to pin faith down to just one level of consciousness as its a position that makes claims about, and I can't stress this enough, everything. Where you are in space, your position in society and your future.

There is no obvious relation between what you've presented and your conclusion.
This needs more padding out.

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: So you interpret countless hours of conversation concerning flaws on a faith position that governs alot of peoples worldviews to be not starting the conversation...

No.

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: and thus a faith position?

Not a position of an "active" faith.

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: I'm not even sure what the relation between the first part concerning that book on neuroscience and this notion is.

Not a book on neuroscience.

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: Alright, the human mind is capable of imagining things that less intelligent animals cannot... so? How does that backup your position?

Simulation of deep future is not simply imagination.

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: Also you "believe" its a construct of the third? So he doesn't actually say it is, does he. Thats something you've added on. Even if this is the case it would seem a mistake to pin faith down to just one level of consciousness as its a position that makes claims about, and I can't stress this enough, everything. Where you are in space, your position in society and your future.

I'm the living word of Gwynnite, he's Michio Kaku

(October 9, 2015 at 12:43 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: There is no obvious relation between what you've presented and your conclusion.
This needs more padding out.

The conjecture is to see faith in terms of being an aspect of the ability to simulate future.

This is passive faith.







This is active faith.





Both are shit.

(October 9, 2015 at 1:20 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Both are shit.

Presuppositionial nonsense.

(October 9, 2015 at 1:13 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: Not a position of an "active" faith.

So a "passive" faith then? This conclusion still needs elaboration on how you came to it.

(October 9, 2015 at 1:13 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: Simulation of deep future is not simply imagination.

What is the distinction between simulation and imagination in your statement? When it comes to the human mind a simulation is what we would imagine a real situation to be like. Our "simulations" of the future are nothing more than our minds best attempt to reconstruct what we think would happen based on the information we have available. It is a deeply flawed process with many pitfalls.

(October 9, 2015 at 1:13 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: The conjecture is to see faith in terms of being an aspect of the ability to simulate future.

But that is not the definition of faith and it is not clear that is solely the source and/or function of faith. If it is a part of what constructs faith then it would seem obvious that in faiths case the deeply flawed process has gone awry. Someone who honestly believes that their future will involve the dead rising from their graves is not making that simulation based upon the usual factors. The prospect that we will die and not return is.
Even if this were not the case; to say that these are simply two sides of the same coin and based on this is without justification. It simply does not follow from this that questioning the validity of faith is in itself a position based on faith. Theres nothing connecting those dots.

I find consulting a dictionary to be a good start.

(October 9, 2015 at 1:54 pm)Napoléon Wrote: I find consulting a dictionary to be a good start.

Gwynnite began with remember standing before the creator of the universe and accepting the title of prophet. And WTF is a prophet but a storyteller. This part of the story began with a walk to work at four in the morning.

When a random stuck a gun in my face and demanded my discman. There's another story connecting this CD player to my Gwynnies, but the point is that when I asked myself if I'm ready to die for a CD player, self said hell no, but Gwynnie got me that CD player, so fuck him.

So I chased a gunman off with a box cutter, and my Gwynnies. A test of faith I aced without realizing it was a test (It wasn't a test). Later I analysed the experience and noted that faith in god was unnecessary, what did the job was faith in my identity. That I am "I love my Gwynnies" and that is more than enough.

So the simulation of future acquires these experiences for further simulations. A conjecture is made, "Hold fast teh Gwynnies" in all boss fights for assured victory. Repeatedly and absurdly retested. 

But I got to thinking, this faith is something all humans share. The question is then why would I desire to label this aspect of simulation faith...

It's because of the feels, man. 

I think the revealed religions get built up over time and individuals around these kernels of faith.

Cool story bro