RE: Question about "faith"
September 24, 2020 at 6:01 pm
(This post was last modified: September 24, 2020 at 6:06 pm by Simon Moon.)
(September 24, 2020 at 5:49 pm)Belacqua Wrote:(September 24, 2020 at 9:31 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: When something is based on evidence and reason, I find that I need not exert any will to believe it.
It may be that in your case, reason and the emotions are in perfect alignment. This would make you very rare, I think.
I don't think it is as rare as you think. I have the exact same feelings as Mister Agenda.
One of my main motivations in life, is to hold as many true beliefs, and to eliminate as many false beliefs, from my mind, as possible.
The single best method EVER discovered by humanity, as a reliable path to truth, is to base one's beliefs on: demonstrable, verifiable, and falsifiable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid and sound logic.
If someone is able to prove I have a belief that is not based on the above criteria, you know what I'll do? Stop believing it. No matter how emotionally attached I am to it, or no matter how much of a hit to my ego it is. That's how intellectual honesty works!
That plane you claim one has 'faith' in, our extended life spans (double in just a bit over a 100 years), the computer and networks you are using right now, etc, etc, etc, are all due to using the above method.
Quote:As has been described several times on this thread, faith comes into play when the emotions differ from reason.
Please let us know, how this 'method' of relying on emotion that differ from reason, has ever shown to be a reliable path to truth. After all, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc, etc, all use the same 'method', and they all get to different conclusions.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.