Why is faith important?

[jstrodel]

Well, I understand your skepticism for taking my testimony seriously.

But if you consider that nearly every society in history from Jews (with Hasidic mysticism) to Christians (with the Catholics and charismatic mystics) to Muslims (they have their own mystical tradition) to Hindu's (a variety of mystical traditions) and Buddhists (also emphasize the supernatural) and animists, wicca, satanism and various other groups, shamans, has had some sort of tradition of the spiritual world.

That adds up to millions of separate TESTIMONIES. Of course, there are billions of people in the world, and not all have had supernatural experiences. But there are millions of people who have directly practiced some form of mysticism or magic or something like this. The collective, cultural experience of each culture points to the supernatural, but that ould be ad populum.

A testimony, however is not ad populum. If you want to prove there was a murder, the more people you have as witnesses, the stronger the evidence.

I can promise you that it is real. I understand, my testimony is not the best.

Do you know who Saul Kripke is? He is one of the most famous logicians of the 20th century. He talks about how materialism is a "prejudice that many have". He thinks that most people accept materialism based as a prejudice. The word is ironic, since materialists reduce the vast majority of the worlds mystical culture to what they consider "prejudice" based on a scientific studies that they have done of supernatural practice done from their presuppositions about what mysticism is or what it should fit into.

I used to spend 30 hours a week praying and seeking God. I could feel His presence consistently. I have experience so many prayers.

Seek for yourself. I would recommend the book celebration of discipline by Richard Foster. Just try doing some of the disciplines and not thinking about it so hard and asking God to meet you. You will see that it is real, if you really turn toward God. Might not happen the first time, but it did for me. http://www.amazon.com/Celebration-Discip...discipline

[Darkstar]

But if you consider that nearly every society in history from Jews (with Hasidic mysticism) to Christians (with the Catholics and charismatic mystics) to Muslims (they have their own mystical tradition) to Hindu's (a variety of mystical traditions) and Buddhists (also emphasize the supernatural) and animists, wicca, satanism and various other groups, shamans, has had some sort of tradition of the spiritual world.

So...the testominies of superstitious ancient people who had no/minimal understanding of science...are now valid? If so many people knew these things, wouldn't it be public knowledge by now?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/m...paranormal

[downbeatplumb]

Darkstar, plenty of people can demonstrate that. But can you demonstrate the truth of nuclear physics in a history library?

Nuclear physics is well documented with lots of peer reviewed articles about what it is, how it works, the history of how the discoveries came about.

You can read about the work that has gone into it. he theory behind it. The maths that support it and the effect it had on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

You would even find out ways to study it directly if you had the right equipment and funds.[/quote]

Why not?

Well you kinda can because the supporting EVIDENCE is overwhelming.

So that means that nuclear physics must be false because it can't be demonstrated in a history lab. Of course this is fallacious.

You picked a very poor strawman and WTF is a history lab?
History is archaeology sometimes they use chemists sometimes they use biologists but a history lab?

The spiritual world is real, light and dark. I would highly recommend that you not involve yourself in the dark part of it, but it is real.

No it isn't.

Its stories that some people choose to believe because they want to believe.

[jstrodel]

But if you consider that nearly every society in history from Jews (with Hasidic mysticism) to Christians (with the Catholics and charismatic mystics) to Muslims (they have their own mystical tradition) to Hindu's (a variety of mystical traditions) and Buddhists (also emphasize the supernatural) and animists, wicca, satanism and various other groups, shamans, has had some sort of tradition of the spiritual world.

So...the testominies of superstitious ancient people who had no/minimal understanding of science...are now valid? If so many people knew these things, wouldn't it be public knowledge by now?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/m...paranormal

It is public knowledge, outside of atheist circles. Most people in history have accepted the reality of miracles, and most people in history have experienced miracles directly.

I fail to see how having a knowledge of science invalidates their testimony. By that standard human lack of understanding of the processes that existed before the big bang would invalidate our entire worldview and everything that we know today. Of course that isn't true, and if there was some sort of science tomorrow that could explain the big bang, that was not consistent with modern science, that use some vastly superior method, that would not invalidiate what we know today anymore than the Greeks lack of knowledge about science invalidates their understanding of philosophy.

What you dismiss as superstition with no evidence other people have held to with the much stronger form of evidence of their testimony.

---

Nuclear physics is well documented with lots of peer reviewed articles about what it is, how it works, the history of how the discoveries came about.

That does not prove that it could possibly be known apart from a very specific procedur involved in knowing it.

You picked a very poor strawman and WTF is a history lab?
History is archaeology sometimes they use chemists sometimes they use biologists but a history lab?

A place in which historical objects are analyzed using historical methods, like the ones that you have mentioned. It is not a straw-man, if you are demanding that all ancient culture conforms to some sort of science or modern method, why not demand that all of nuclear physics conforms to historical methods?

I think if someone doesn't use historical methods on everything, it must be because they are superstitious.

No it isn't.

Its stories that some people choose to believe because they want to believe.

You just made an assertion without argument or evidence.

[tokutter]

Well, I understand your skepticism for taking my testimony seriously.

But if you consider that nearly every society in history from Jews (with Hasidic mysticism) to Christians (with the Catholics and charismatic mystics) to Muslims (they have their own mystical tradition) to Hindu's (a variety of mystical traditions) and Buddhists (also emphasize the supernatural) and animists, wicca, satanism and various other groups, shamans, has had some sort of tradition of the spiritual world.

That adds up to millions of separate TESTIMONIES. Of course, there are billions of people in the world, and not all have had supernatural experiences. But there are millions of people who have directly practiced some form of mysticism or magic or something like this. The collective, cultural experience of each culture points to the supernatural, but that ould be ad populum.

A testimony, however is not ad populum. If you want to prove there was a murder, the more people you have as witnesses, the stronger the evidence.

I can promise you that it is real. I understand, my testimony is not the best.

Do you know who Saul Kripke is? He is one of the most famous logicians of the 20th century. He talks about how materialism is a "prejudice that many have". He thinks that most people accept materialism based as a prejudice. The word is ironic, since materialists reduce the vast majority of the worlds mystical culture to what they consider "prejudice" based on a scientific studies that they have done of supernatural practice done from their presuppositions about what mysticism is or what it should fit into.

I used to spend 30 hours a week praying and seeking God. I could feel His presence consistently. I have experience so many prayers.

Seek for yourself. I would recommend the book celebration of discipline by Richard Foster. Just try doing some of the disciplines and not thinking about it so hard and asking God to meet you. You will see that it is real, if you really turn toward God. Might not happen the first time, but it did for me. http://www.amazon.com/Celebration-Discip...discipline

Did I miss something here or are you saying that you take the testimonies of other people from other religions with a different god than yours.......as real?

[Jackalope]

It is public knowledge, outside of atheist circles. Most people in history have accepted the reality of miracles,

Argumentum ad populum

and most people in history have experienced miracles directly.

Argumentum ad populum
Unsupported assertion (that people believe something occurred, is not evidence that something did in fact occur, or that it was a non-natural event).

[Darkstar]

I fail to see how having a knowledge of science invalidates their testimony.

Because when they are asked to prove that they really can use psychihc powers/summon spirits, etc. they either refuse or fail to do so.

By that standard human lack of understanding of the processes that existed before the big bang would invalidate our entire worldview and everything that we know today.

Lack of understanding? No. The problem is not that we don't know how people consort with demons (or whatever you mean to say), but that we can't find any evidence that they do at all in the first place. We cannot establish how it is done if it cannot be established that it is even done (by the person claiming they can do it, no less).

What you dismiss as superstition with no evidence

If it has no evidence, it is superstition.
...okay, here's the rest of that sentence:

other people have held to with the much stronger form of evidence of their testimony.

Actually, personal trstimony is one of the weakest forms of evidence there is. I could testify to literally anything right now, but I cannot prove my testimony is possibly true with science if it is impossible.

One asks for proof, they refuse. Another asks, and they try, but fail to give it. What is someone supposed to make of this? The stars were out of alignment, that's why my dowsing rod didn't work, right...
(By the way, do you believe dowsing rods work, and why do you believe the way you do?)

[Jackalope]

It is public knowledge, outside of atheist circles. Most people in history have accepted the reality of miracles,

Argumentum ad populum

and most people in history have experienced miracles directly.

Argumentum ad populum
Unsupported assertion (that people believe something occurred, is not evidence that something did in fact occur, or that it was a non-natural event).

By now, you've no doubt seen a few of these, where I break down the fallacies you've employed. Are you going to continue with the insistence that you've brought reason to the table?

[jstrodel]

Did I miss something here or are you saying that you take the testimonies of other people from other religions with a different god than yours.......as real?

Their testimonies are real. They are experiencing something, whether it is some sort of psychological trick or a real spiritual force. That does not validate their theology though.

---

Argumentum ad populum


Argumentum ad populum
Unsupported assertion (that people believe something occurred, is not evidence that something did in fact occur, or that it was a non-natural event).

By now, you've no doubt seen a few of these, where I break down the fallacies you've employed. Are you going to continue with the insistence that you've brought reason to the table?

Your claim is different than actually showing this. A testimony is a historical document. People would not reduce what the majority of ancient people believed and recorded to be an argument ad populum. You are just using certain categories, you are not actually making an argument. You did not even respond to what I wrote about that earlier.

---

There is no human activity in which science is the only means of validating truth claims.

---

I fail to see how having a knowledge of science invalidates their testimony.

Because when they are asked to prove that they really can use psychihc powers/summon spirits, etc. they either refuse or fail to do so.

By that standard human lack of understanding of the processes that existed before the big bang would invalidate our entire worldview and everything that we know today.

Lack of understanding? No. The problem is not that we don't know how people consort with demons (or whatever you mean to say), but that we can't find any evidence that they do at all in the first place. We cannot establish how it is done if it cannot be established that it is even done (by the person claiming they can do it, no less).

What you dismiss as superstition with no evidence

If it has no evidence, it is superstition.
...okay, here's the rest of that sentence:

other people have held to with the much stronger form of evidence of their testimony.

Actually, personal trstimony is one of the weakest forms of evidence there is. I could testify to literally anything right now, but I cannot prove my testimony is possibly true with science if it is impossible.

One asks for proof, they refuse. Another asks, and they try, but fail to give it. What is someone supposed to make of this? The stars were out of alignment, that's why my dowsing rod didn't work, right...
(By the way, do you believe dowsing rods work, and why do you believe the way you do?)

There is tons of evidence for the supernatural, but typically it is not in the form that science can study in the same way that physics is in a form that history cannot study.

Your basic assumption is that if something is not knowable using scientific methods, it is someone that you can safely ignore. Do you have any evidence for this?

[Jackalope]

Your claim is different than actually showing this. A testimony is a historical document. People would not reduce what the majority of ancient people believed and recorded to be an argument ad populum. You are just using certain categories, you are not actually making an argument. You did not even respond to what I wrote about that earlier.

Testimony CAN be a historical document, but that says nothing about it's truth value.

You argument essentially boils down to "A lot of people claim that they have experienced the supernatural". Absent anything to corroborate said claims, the claim is extremely weak.

In addition, that people claim something says nothing about it's truth value. Non-sequitur / unsupported assertion.

My argument boils down to "your argument is fallacious and your conclusions are a non-sequitur". Your argument deserves nothing more.

Incidentally, I didn't respond to your other post because I had not yet seen it.