Is faith a reliable means of ascertaining the truth?

[Milton Platt]

True. The actual delusion say a person isn't real just because the person thinks he sees it. The different criteria of the factual experience is different thereby that person existing is a fact not by material evidence but by experience.

So, I don't understand if something isn't real (say god), what makes people question even to the point of debating about it? Claims don't make something true anymore than delusions make the person exist. I dont see the two an issue.

Why do others?



To him, it is. That's fine. The authorities aren't concerned with his delusions or perceptions but his actions based on it. Unlike others with healthy delusions, he'd probably be treated for whatever he has so he can either live with it or get rid of it all together. The delusion doesn't hurt anyone.

If he didn't beat her, why would he delusions and justification of it be an issue?



If she doesn't hurt herself, others, and she can take care of herself, I would find it more hurtful to say her (pretending) her beliefs are not justified nor her justifications of it rather addressing the experiences-what is real.

That's just it, isn't it? Her perceptions of the world were vastly wrong, leading her to further delusional behavior, some of it harmful to herself. When someone is paranoid-schizophrenic and bipolar, allowing the person to believe what they see is factual is not an acceptable way to go. Medication and firm guidance is required. Been there, done that........

I cannot think of a single healthy delusion. Unless of course you think that vegetarianism might be a delusion. LOL

 

[Milton Platt]

It is wrong by criteria you set on it. In and of itself, I don't see it wrong. When I was in the Church I experienced Jesus' spirit in the Eucharist, the rush of the sacraments, and union with the Body of Christ, saints, and jesus himself. It didn't harm me physically. It didn't make me think anything insane and I didn't need to be treated for it.

It isn't morally wrong to believe in something that you feel doesn't correlate to reality. If you're not talking about material facts, what criteria are you using to determine what belief is fact or fiction?

I am talking about material facts. There are no immaterial facts. Beliefs inform actions. Because of your beliefs surrounding Christianity, for instance, a part of your life was wasted that you can never recover. You could have done meaningful things with that time. So in that regard, harm was done to you by your beliefs.
And quoting a single instance does not prove the point. Isis members also believe they are doing spiritual work in killing infidels. Christians believe they are doing god's work by discouraging condoms in HIV ridden African nations. False beliefs can do unbelievable harm.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's just it, isn't it? Her perceptions of the world were vastly wrong, leading her to further delusional behavior, some of it harmful to herself. When someone is paranoid-schizophrenic and bipolar, allowing the person to believe what they see is factual is not an acceptable way to go. Medication and firm guidance is required. Been there, done that........

I cannot think of a single healthy delusion. Unless of course you think that vegetarianism might be a delusion. LOL

Hmmm. You never know. Some people feel organic food is 100 percent organic.

Using me as an example. I believed in how I best defined god. I believe spirits and jesus in the Eucharist. I also believed in the spirit of christ in the church, communion of saints, forgiveness in confession, and how I could best understand Christ Passion.

This did not lead me to have a second inquisition. I didn't harm anyone. If anything, these beliefs (or delusions if one likes) lead me to a good spiritual path where I knew more about myself, what I believe, what I don't, and where to go from there. The experience is very real and the cultural that builds up on those experiences (confirmed bias, we'll say) supports it in relation to how I view reality.

These are things I learned not things that was already built in from the past. I experienced this for the first time.

I know many people who say my experiences are wrong but how were my experiences or delusions dangerous?

Wouldn't that be based on the person's behavior and not the delusion itself?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I am talking about material facts. There are no immaterial facts. Beliefs inform actions. Because of your beliefs surrounding Christianity, for instance, a part of your life was wasted that you can never recover. You could have done meaningful things with that time. So in that regard, harm was done to you by your beliefs.
And quoting a single instance does not prove the point. Isis members also believe they are doing spiritual work in killing infidels. Christians believe they are doing god's work by discouraging condoms in HIV ridden African nations. False beliefs can do unbelievable harm.

'those fightin' words there. I address this in part in the one I just posted. Sorry for the repeat, I do that often.

I wouldn't say my time was wasted. I learned a lot about myself from those four years. I came in as a convert so I had no bias against the Church, no indoctrination, and no judging based on people's actions within the Church. Never was my style.

A lot of people can't (rather don't want to0) face reality because it literally would kill them to know god doesn't exist or there is no pattern to the universe only to humans. They'd panic if they knew life ends with no everlasting life. Many psychologist nowadays are learning that these things don't make people crazy or they need to be treated because of X delusions. I have epilepsy, and I had some delusions but the doctors were not concerned about that. That's just a symptom of the seizures. They were more concerned with how the seizures were deforming my brain slowly. The brain surgery was to get rid of the seizures because of life and death not because I was hearing things before I have a seizure.

Sometimes you have to give in to let what makes people comfortable because in some cases they can't see reality because that Is there reality.

Who are we to say we have reality, really? That's like saying we know everything just because we think we know the material world is all there is. Space is so huge how on earth can we claim we know the boundaries of it.

That's playing god, to put it ironically.

 

[Milton Platt]

Hmmm. You never know. Some people feel organic food is 100 percent organic.

Using me as an example. I believed in how I best defined god. I believe spirits and jesus in the Eucharist. I also believed in the spirit of christ in the church, communion of saints, forgiveness in confession, and how I could best understand Christ Passion.

This did not lead me to have a second inquisition. I didn't harm anyone. If anything, these beliefs (or delusions if one likes) lead me to a good spiritual path where I knew more about myself, what I believe, what I don't, and where to go from there. The experience is very real and the cultural that builds up on those experiences (confirmed bias, we'll say) supports it in relation to how I view reality.

These are things I learned not things that was already built in from the past. I experienced this for the first time.

I know many people who say my experiences are wrong but how were my experiences or delusions dangerous?

Wouldn't that be based on the person's behavior and not the delusion itself?

Well, yes, Carlita....to a point. But if someone spent many hours over their lifetime going to and from a particular church and many hours praying to a god they thought was actually real, and gave money to the particular Christian faction they liked, that is a part of their life and a part of their resources that was wasted if the beliefs were not true. I would say that was harmful to the person because it robbed them of part of their life and resources under false pretenses. Not all harms have to be big ones. Sure, it is possible there were benefits as well. But there may be other ways to derive those benefits without living a lie. I know of nothing a church can to to better the world that cannot be done without the church.

 

[Milton Platt]

'those fightin' words there. I address this in part in the one I just posted. Sorry for the repeat, I do that often.

I wouldn't say my time was wasted. I learned a lot about myself from those four years. I came in as a convert so I had no bias against the Church, no indoctrination, and no judging based on people's actions within the Church. Never was my style.

A lot of people can't (rather don't want to0) face reality because it literally would kill them to know god doesn't exist or there is no pattern to the universe only to humans. They'd panic if they knew life ends with no everlasting life. Many psychologist nowadays are learning that these things don't make people crazy or they need to be treated because of X delusions. I have epilepsy, and I had some delusions but the doctors were not concerned about that. That's just a symptom of the seizures. They were more concerned with how the seizures were deforming my brain slowly. The brain surgery was to get rid of the seizures because of life and death not because I was hearing things before I have a seizure.

Sometimes you have to give in to let what makes people comfortable because in some cases they can't see reality because that Is there reality.

Who are we to say we have reality, really? That's like saying we know everything just because we think we know the material world is all there is. Space is so huge how on earth can we claim we know the boundaries of it.

That's playing god, to put it ironically.

Wow...I had a sister-in-law who was epileptic. She didn't have major life-threatening seizures, or delusions but would just pass out and drop to the floor for an hour or so without warning.

The reality we perceive is the only one we can know, so whether there are other realities isn't important to one's life. We have to deal with the one we have.

I understand about giving in to allowing someone to persist in a delusion for their sake, at the moment. that does not make the delusion factually real. At some point, the delusion needs to be replaced by reality, though.
There is not much you can do for anyone who does not want to face reality (know what is actually true). But it cannot help but be harmful to persist in fantasy.

 

[robocop (actually)]

It is more important what we do with faith than what we do with knowledge. When we know the way to go, we usually take it. When we have to vaguely trust ourselves, it is harder and more important.

 

[sun rise]

And yet, they all reached different conclusions......so much for faith.

"Blind Men and the Elephant"

 

[Milton Platt]

It is more important what we do with faith than what we do with knowledge. When we know the way to go, we usually take it. When we have to vaguely trust ourselves, it is harder and more important.

I think that the things humanity has done over the years based upon actual knowledge have been more useful that things done based on faith. Virtually everything in the modern world is based on science to some degree.

 

[Milton Platt]

"Blind Men and the Elephant"

Worse than that...the blind men at least had something tangible to inspect.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I think that the things humanity has done over the years based upon actual knowledge have been more useful that things done based on faith. Virtually everything in the modern world is based on science to some degree.

Touche', but perhaps it is more important to do science where you are grasping at beliefs than science where you already know the formula. Otherwise you cannot come up with new formulas. There is faith and deduction in science too is all I'm saying.

 

[Skwim]

I think I have the right to exercise my skepticism as much as other people.

Yup. But there's no skepticism in "Extraordinary claims are extraordinarily hard to believe; thus, I am a believer in God." It's a simple "A therefore B" statement, which is a curious way of regarding extraordinary claims.

.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well, yes, Carlita....to a point. But if someone spent many hours over their lifetime going to and from a particular church and many hours praying to a god they thought was actually real, and gave money to the particular Christian faction they liked, that is a part of their life and a part of their resources that was wasted if the beliefs were not true.

I would say that was harmful to the person because it robbed them of part of their life and resources under false pretenses.

Not all harms have to be big ones. Sure, it is possible there were benefits as well. But there may be other ways to derive those benefits without living a lie. I know of nothing a church can to to better the world that cannot be done without the church.

What is the difference in believing something is materially real and something that is not when the same benefits are received regardless?

If you and a christian gave to charity, both of you would have given money. Since charity has no reservations, the person you two gave help to wouldn't deny one charity on the basis of believing something that isn't real.

Wouldn't you be wasting your money just the same as the Christian? I don't understand how the belief behind the intent invalidates the "sense" of what motivated the charitable person.

The money etc didn't rob the person (like delusions, they can't do anything) it's the person using the money and resources to better help someone in need. What motivated him is no more than point than the action derived from that motivation. A priest told me in confession that sinful thoughts will come and go. There is no need to be absolved from them. When it turns into action, that's when one needs forgiveness. (Same view as police and medics. The thought is not the focus it's the action)

I don't see how living a lie is harmful unless that person interprets that lie and beats their wife because of it. I never got that feeling when I was in the Church to harm anyone. Lies and delusions in and of themselves can't harm me. I'm just fortunate that I was not indoctrinated and more open minded. The only way I can say I wasted my time in the Church is that I believed something I know is real and did not benefit me in the long run. I wasn't living a lie but one of many religious lives that did not benefit my mental state of mind.

Not everyone is like me, though. For others, these lies (which I would never say) are their reality. It is their truth. They can't see anything else but this.

I honestly don't understand how material facts are all there is to base this life on. It's like confinding space into a box.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Wow...I had a sister-in-law who was epileptic. She didn't have major life-threatening seizures, or delusions but would just pass out and drop to the floor for an hour or so without warning.

In my opinion, that sounds like atonic seizures. Is she still having them?

The reality we perceive is the only one we can know, so whether there are other realities isn't important to one's life. We have to deal with the one we have.

That makes sense. What I believe is reality is a cycle of rebirth after rebirth until we actually die. So, the reality I know sees death as a transition rather than an end. Present life is a continuum. So, dealing with this life is dealing with "the next life."

Living for the future to me has always caused problems. So, I never make appointments too far in advance and things like that. For other people, it works out for them. They can schedule a vacation months in advance and still make it.

Another way to put it is, it is usually important to have a goal before making steps to get to that goal. If that goal is a delusion or false but the steps towards it helps the person, I don't see an issue with the goal just the behaviors they make getting to that goal.

I'm not agnostic but I'll play agnostic devil's advocate. How do you know there is no god? We didn't know we can land on the moon years ago and now we can. We know now that seizures aren't demons (or the holy spirit) in us but actual neurological rather than psychological conditions. We aren't in an advance stage of life. That's ego talking and a want to stay in our present day without thinking of the future (our death).

I understand about giving in to allowing someone to persist in a delusion for their sake, at the moment. that does not make the delusion factually real. At some point, the delusion needs to be replaced by reality, though.

No. If it doesn't harm others, self, or that person can self-care, I see no problem. That's like a psychologist treating a client with delusions because he thinks the client is living a lie when in fact the client knows what he sees is real and a delusion at the same time without pressed for a cure. What is there to cure when there isn't anything wrong.

There is not much you can do for anyone who does not want to face reality (know what is actually true). But it cannot help but be harmful to persist in fantasy.

What can reality do for someone indoctrinated in a lie?

If you're seen the Original Star Trek, here is a good clip from a episode relating to this topic.

The girl and her community where living a lie. Spock and Kirk decided to rid them of their lie even though they were healthy and happy there. Kirk rather for them to struggle and hurt and face reality. He did more harm than good. If anything, he could have lived an illusion of control and knowledge when life doesn't need to be just that.

 

[Profound Realization]

That was in response to you saying: "What would be wrong with anyone living their life in blissful ignorance?"

I didn't judge you. In fact I welcomed you to live just as ignorantly as you choose. And you should really read back through the posts were I talked about how improbable life is in the universe, since 99.99% of it is inhospitable to life.

You may have not made too many judgements on me as you have to others. I am not offended, however it was more of me trying to pick your mind as to a reason as to why the truth mattered so much, so much that so many judgements are made on others who think differently.
To put it simply, why should one seek to know truth? Why is there only one way(your way) to reach the truth when only a very tiny percentage of things are observable and measureable?

Also to touch base on how you perceive faith, if you're searching for a "mythical being," of course you won't find anything. You've already confirmed, through bias what you're searching for and deemed it's non-existence. I would think for any truth to come intuitively, someone's mind would have to be in a zero-state, that is to say... having zero bias, zero preconceived imaginations of what something ought to be or appear.

At the end of the day, it is by faith that you believe that life came from non-life randomly, accidentally. Stubbornness in anyone may not want to admit such.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Since people can have faith in things that are clearly false, how can anyone claim that faith is required in order to comprehend truth?

Faith needs to be paired with verification. If I have faith that doing A will get me B, and B doesn't happen, I need to be adult enough to question and look at other options.

I feel that is what Jesus asked us to do with "judge a tree by its fruit" and "judge not, lest ye be judged" and "if your arm causes you to sin, cut it off". There has to be some kind of rubric where we determine the accuracy of our beliefs with the rest of the universe.

If it's a fact backed up by verifiable evidence, why would one require faith?

Maybe faith, at least as commonly used, is more about devotion than "trust" or whatever the actual history of the word is. This is why people can look the Truth straight in the face and deny it, all because their egos demand it. I am devoted to Truth. I realize that as humans we'll likely never get to have the "whole" thing (not that it might even BE a thing, as times change and so does other stuff in reality), but I feel the need to go for the closest thing to Truth we've got at the moment.

If you fall in love with someone, do you need someone to give you evidence of their love or can you have a genuine all around attraction by just being around each other displays more love than getting roses or or chocolates?

Attraction is one thing. Yes, I want evidence of "love".

Do you need evidence from a family member to know they love you or do you know regardless?

Have you SEEN my family?

Do you need evidence in order to trust someone?

For someone who grew up with lies and abuse, yes, yes I require evidence.

What would be wrong with anyone living their life in blissful ignorance?

To claim one follows the True Religion and then completely discount anything True gives me pause, actually. I loathe hypocrisy above all else.

Do they go to eternal hell or something after they die for not being scientifically eloquent?

Eternal science classes.

I had a mother-in-law we took care of for 10 plus years. she saw things like circuses on the front lawn, neighbors communicating behind her back by tapping out signals on the ground to each other, and many other absurdities. To her they were real. But her beliefs did not alter reality.

My mother doesn't understand how computer cookies and commercials work. All of them are directly about her, according to her. Sure, I do have some family members bored with their lives and troll her, but GD, she's paranoid.

So, I don't understand if something isn't real (say god), what makes people question even to the point of debating about it? Claims don't make something true anymore than delusions make the person exist. I dont see the two an issue.

My mother fell in love with a talk show host and later a fictional character. She constantly sees them as the same person AND that they are married. I support her in all possible ways. It irks me when she claims to have this wonderful husband who isn't doing squat for her because SHE'S NOT MARRIED TO A FIGMENT OF HER IMAGINATION. I mean, I have fantasy boyfriends, but I don't go around trying to change my name on things. She was actually getting mail and such using the last name of her fictional husband. I had no choice but to put a stop to it because I was afraid the talk show host would at least sue her for harassment.

 

[Profound Realization]

Faith needs to be paired with verification. If I have faith that doing A will get me B, and B doesn't happen, I need to be adult enough to question and look at other options.

I feel that is what Jesus asked us to do with "judge a tree by its fruit" and "judge not, lest ye be judged" and "if your arm causes you to sin, cut it off". There has to be some kind of rubric where we determine the accuracy of our beliefs with the rest of the universe.


Maybe faith, at least as commonly used, is more about devotion than "trust" or whatever the actual history of the word is. This is why people can look the Truth straight in the face and deny it, all because their egos demand it. I am devoted to Truth. I realize that as humans we'll likely never get to have the "whole" thing (not that it might even BE a thing, as times change and so does other stuff in reality), but I feel the need to go for the closest thing to Truth we've got at the moment.


Attraction is one thing. Yes, I want evidence of "love".


Have you SEEN my family?


For someone who grew up with lies and abuse, yes, yes I require evidence.


To claim one follows the True Religion and then completely discount anything True gives me pause, actually. I loathe hypocrisy above all else.


Eternal science classes.




My mother doesn't understand how computer cookies and commercials work. All of them are directly about her, according to her. Sure, I do have some family members bored with their lives and troll her, but GD, she's paranoid.


My mother fell in love with a talk show host and later a fictional character. She constantly sees them as the same person AND that they are married. I support her in all possible ways. It irks me when she claims to have this wonderful husband who isn't doing squat for her because SHE'S NOT MARRIED TO A FIGMENT OF HER IMAGINATION. I mean, I have fantasy boyfriends, but I don't go around trying to change my name on things. She was actually getting mail and such using the last name of her fictional husband. I had no choice but to put a stop to it because I was afraid the talk show host would at least sue her for harassment.

Eternal science classes, love it .

 

[Grandliseur]

Yup. But there's no skepticism in "Extraordinary claims are extraordinarily hard to believe; thus, I am a believer in God." It's a simple "A therefore B" statement, which is a curious way of regarding extraordinary claims.

.

To me that there need be a creator is one of these 'duh' conclusions -- too obvious to miss.

All this other stuff is expressed here: "Woe to those drawing error with ropes of untruth. . ." This may be applied to what some churches also teach, but this clever continual compounding of lie after lie - that evolution contains, like ropes of untruth one following after another, the extraordinary impossible claims - lead me nowhere. Thus, I am a believer in God; whether he believes in me or not.

You are welcome to your beliefs for sure. I wonder, have you read Richard Milton's Shattering the Myths of Darwinism?
Of course, both sides go at it with never ending arguments. Nowadays, I am happy in my own convictions, I study things and make my own conclusions. Others should likewise make their own conclusions. It is no skin off my nose what others believe. However, it is at times fun to see what some PhDs say on the subject, for and against.

Here I have observed that some who don't like an argument from Creationists may succumb to personality assassination rather than address the subject raised. This kind of argument is obscene and also demonstrates that the person knows they have lost the argument.

Unfortunately, I have also encountered Cs whom I think have the same PhD-type of pride and look down on others not interested in anything they have to bring to the table regarding YEC, etc.

 

[David T]

It seems to me that people are capable of having faith in virtually anything. Since people can have faith in things that are clearly false, how can anyone claim that faith is required in order to comprehend truth?

No. But if you are nearly tone deaf, and can barely hear, and you can just barely hear the music then faith is important. Is religion garbled? Indeed it is. It's one nearly deaf individual talking to another nearly deaf individual that's contemporary religion. They have faith in the music. What is atheism? It's just deaf. Zero capacity, so it's simply mainfesting what is already problematic in religion itself. Atheism relies on religion for its views and understanding, all it hears is the noise of normal culture is all. The only atheists I know in the woods are poachers and tourists. I don't think with a healthy dose of wilderness that people come back atheists, and often times they start to hear the music themselves. Atheism is a city problem of city folk who live in a box of being highly educated. No one who has embraced the wild-ear-Ness is an atheist we all hear the music in that which you all call nature. It's a song very loud that to much city makes us deaf to is all.

 

[Hawkins]

Faith is not a reliable means of ascertaining truth. It's no better than guessing. But I don't think most people who value faith value it as a means of discerning truth.

What? People believing daily news with faith. That's how they get to know what are happening in this world on a daily basis.