Faith!

[mibn2cweus]

. . . ainnit just a euphemism, a glorified alternative or sanctimonious excuse for . . . ignorance?

[Ankou]

well i wouldn't go that far vulcan, but if you start getting tempted by goats blood and vestal virgins then you might need an ab break!

[Philoctetes]

On the surface - yes. But you have loaded the question by the way you phrase it. Of course we all rely on faith - even Richard Dawkins has areas where he has to accept "givens" without question - and that is Faith

[naomi24]

Philoctetes, That isn't right. We don't all rely on faith. Richard Dawkins accepts 'givens' until further evidence is available. If that evidence indicates that the 'givens' he accepted are wrong, he is willing to change his opinion. No rational person accepts anything without question.

[mibn2cweus]

Would you be so kind as to provide an example Philoctetes? I wouldn't expect you to just take my word for it.

[Old_Geezer]

Well I have faith that the universe I seem to sense 'out there' really does exist, but yes you are quite right, it is ignorance on my part, I may be imagining it and imagining I'm typing this now. How sanctimonious of me :-(

[starone]

Thanks flip - off now to look at Amazon and see if I can buy one cheaply. 1p is my favourite price - plus p and p at £2,80, which gives me a good read for £2.81. What more couldyou hope for?

[starone]

Bought one - new and for 1p!! Now just have to wait for it to arrive now - unbelievable price isn't it?

[mibn2cweus]

//Well I have faith that the universe I seem to sense 'out there' really does exist, but yes you are quite right, it is ignorance on my part, I may be imagining it and imagining I'm typing this now. How sanctimonious of me :-(//

I've found the universe, to the extent I understand it, provides sufficient proof of and reason for belief in its existence without any need of or recourse to faith or contradiction . . . whether I like it or not. To the extent I have come to a certain knowledge of it, I've found it worth getting to know better and found that knowledge worth exchanging and sharing with friends who have proven themselves to be much more than make believe. But I would never insist on or even suggest that any one of them simply take my word for anything.

[Khandro]

I said to myself I won't come back to this thread, however, vulcan wants to know how a question can be sadistic;
On December 21st 1988 John Mosley drove his daughter Helga to the airport for her to join PanAm 103 to New York. He returned home to his family where they learnt that it had crashed on Lockerbie killing everyone on board. When the first reporters got to his door he was asked "You're a Christian minister" (Moseley is a Pentecostal priest) "Hasn't this destroyed your faith?" Just 24 hours after hearing the news he replied, "So far the grace of God has been more real than we ever dared believe." You might have thought he would have resented being asked such a blunt and troubling question. But now he's grateful. He believes it forced him to rationalise what he was feeling, and to find a form of words to express it. He said " The moment when you encapsulate what's happened in words, it becomes more real."
You may not know what he meant, I'm not even sure I know what he meant, but he knew what he meant. So scoff on!

[naomi24]

Khandro, Mr Mosley was grateful that the question had been asked, so I think you've scored something of a home goal with that example.

[Old_Geezer]

The universe can not provide proof as you can only experience through what you believe is your senses and that may or may not be reality. All you can do is confirm that what you think you experience has a degree of consistency. To go further you need faith in what you believe are your senses. As for others, you have faith they exist, nothing more.

[Old_Geezer]

And maybe not even that. If your thoughts were not working logically and simply gave an appearance of being consistent and logical, how would you know ?

[jno]

do you dismantle your car engine and check it through before you go anywhere? Or do you just - though "ignorant" of whether it is still working today - turn the key in the faith that it will start?

[naomi24]

I would imagine that someone with a dodgy car would 'hope' it starts rather than have 'faith' that it will start. Faith and hope aren't the same thing at all.

[jno]

I wasn't talking about dodgy cars, just ordinary ones. I am indeed ignorant about car engines but I have faith in Peugeot. Also in Hewlett Packard, Bosch and all the rest. So do most people. It's not sanctimonious, it's normal.

[naomi24]

Whilst I trust those brands to a degree, I've no absolute guarantee that they will never let me down, so I don't put my 'faith' in any of them

[Ankou]

your faith in peugeout is most certainly misguided jno.

"telling people at a dinner party you drive a peugeot is like telling them you’ve got the ebola virus and you’re about to sneeze" jc, son of god.

although to be fair i do have quite a few faithful bosch appliances.

[jno]

faith isn't the same as an absolute guarantee. Something has proved reliable in the past so you have faith it will do so again. My Peugeot has worked in the past, for many years. I don't know if Ankou can say the same about his batmobile.

[naomi24]

No, I don't have 'faith' that it will do it again. I just 'hope' it will - and therefore I'm not surprised if it doesn't.

[flip_flop]

Faith, or hope as Naomi correctly puts it, in a tangible object working is entirely different to faith in an intangible, unprovable conceit.