(May 3, 2025 at 3:39 am)Sheldon Wrote: I'd imagine everyone experiences doubt, and those who care about the truth understand this is a good thing....

Doubt has no relation to the truth.

(May 3, 2025 at 11:04 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 3, 2025 at 3:39 am)Sheldon Wrote: It's not clear why John has ignored these two different definitions, or why his arguments use the word trust, that is only found in the primary definition, and doesn't acknowledge the second religious definition of the word at all?

Because definitions are not prescriptive. 

Odd how you leap to a straw man claim, since I never remotely implied they were proscriptive? Nor does this response remotely address what I asked?

Quote:And it is improper usage of a dictionary to shop around the different senses and give them all equal merit. 

Since I have not "shopped around" for anything, or misused the definitions, these two straw man claims are puzzling? As I explained, it seems to be you whose claims are at odds with the common usage, not mine. 

Quote:You are supposed to go and look at the context in which a word is used and be able to infer its meaning. 

An even more bizarre claim? The context is religion, it's in the title, and I offered the definition very precisely in that context. 

Quote:And even if you still care about proper definitions, you need to pull out a Greek concordance and dictionary and research its original usage and meaning, not pull out your merriam-webster.

Well clarity in discourse would be impossible if no one cared about common usage? Now while etymology is fascinating, it is you who would need to explain why you're using the primary definition, and not the religious definition of faith, and if you think the etymology is salient to that explanation then of course offer it, as this response just seems like handwaving. 

One can't claim that a frying pan is an armadillo, then insist anyone objecting, needs to go search the etymology of those words.

(May 3, 2025 at 11:15 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 3, 2025 at 3:39 am)Sheldon Wrote: I'd imagine everyone experiences doubt, and those who care about the truth understand this is a good thing....

Doubt has no relation to the truth.

If one presupposes the truth of a claim, and are more emotionally invested in a subjective belief, than in objectively and critically examining the truth of it, then no, I imagine it does not. 

I think you may have accidentally answered the thread title.

(May 3, 2025 at 11:15 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Doubt has no relation to the truth.

Quote:John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

I think doubt is integral to faith. 

This is all very illuminating, doubt is integral to faith, but has relations to the truth. Hmm


Again, the thread title seems to be getting answered.

(May 3, 2025 at 11:37 am)Sheldon Wrote: If one presupposes the truth of a claim, and are more emotionally invested in a subjective belief, than in objectively and critically examining the truth of it, then no, I imagine it does not. 

Doubt is not a means of examining the truth, it isn't objectively tied to the truth, and it certainly isn't your personal compass for finding truth. Doubt is a psychological state no different than hunger and boredom. So, what do you mean?

(May 3, 2025 at 11:48 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 3, 2025 at 11:37 am)Sheldon Wrote: If one presupposes the truth of a claim, and are more emotionally invested in a subjective belief, than in objectively and critically examining the truth of it, then no, I imagine it does not. 

Doubt is not a means of examining the truth, it isn't objectively tied to the truth, and it certainly isn't your personal compass for finding truth. 

Three more straw man claims. 

Quote:Doubt is a psychological state no different than hunger and boredom. So, what do you mean?

How closely would one examine the veracity of any claim, if one was incapable of doubt?

(May 3, 2025 at 11:58 am)Sheldon Wrote: How closely would one examine the veracity of any claim, if one was incapable of doubt?

As closely as your analytical tools and critical skills allow you. Doubt is not a method of examination.

(May 3, 2025 at 12:05 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 3, 2025 at 11:58 am)Sheldon Wrote: How closely would one examine the veracity of any claim, if one was incapable of doubt?

As closely as your analytical tools and critical skills allow you. 

Why, if you don't doubt the claim?

Quote:Doubt is not a method of examination.

I never said it was.

(May 3, 2025 at 12:09 pm)Sheldon Wrote: Why, if you don't doubt the claim?

Is your position that you cannot ask questions or analyze claims unless you have the experience of doubt? If not, then what are we talking about?