PDA

View Full Version : We are all believers!



Suuryaa
02-08-2012, 17:54
I'm sure in it.:11629:

"A man who is always suspicious can never gain anything worthwhile.
Confidence holds the world and nourishes all. How can a babe thrive if it has no confidence in its mother?
How can a lover gain pleasure if he does not trust his beloved?
How can humanity exist without universal confidence? If you should say, on the other hand, that it is the law of cause and effect, I will tell you; listen to me.
People believe in the law that such a cause produces such a result. Is that not faith?
So then, a man will not dare to breathe in the absence of faith for fear of pathogenic infection, and consequently perish."

peppermintpaddy
02-08-2012, 21:23
I'm sure in it.:11629:

"A man who is always suspicious can never gain anything worthwhile.
Confidence holds the world and nourishes all. How can a babe thrive if it has no confidence in its mother?
How can a lover gain pleasure if he does not trust his beloved?
How can humanity exist without universal confidence? If you should say, on the other hand, that it is the law of cause and effect, I will tell you; listen to me.
People believe in the law that such a cause produces such a result. Is that not faith?
So then, a man will not dare to breathe in the absence of faith for fear of pathogenic infection, and consequently perish."

Talk to rusmeister,he'll understand you..........

Jas
02-08-2012, 22:08
Check my thread on Star Trek for what people shud be believing in this day and age.

mds45
03-08-2012, 11:10
Talk to rusmeister,he'll understand you..........

hahahahahahah wish I thought of writing that - wonderful thanks it made me laugh a lot !!

Suuryaa
03-08-2012, 19:46
I can't call myself an atheist, but I have atheistic tendencies of mind. But when I read this, it struck me that no one could say they are total nonbelievers - they believe that the air they breathe and the water they drink will not kill them, they believe in science, etc.

Ibanez
03-08-2012, 20:05
I'm sure in it.:11629:

"A man who is always suspicious can never gain anything worthwhile.
Confidence holds the world and nourishes all. How can a babe thrive if it has no confidence in its mother?
How can a lover gain pleasure if he does not trust his beloved?
How can humanity exist without universal confidence? If you should say, on the other hand, that it is the law of cause and effect, I will tell you; listen to me.
People believe in the law that such a cause produces such a result. Is that not faith?
So then, a man will not dare to breathe in the absence of faith for fear of pathogenic infection, and consequently perish."


We all believe in the same thing...how we get there is another matter but ultimately less important...

rusmeister
04-08-2012, 08:39
We all believe in the same thing...how we get there is another matter but ultimately less important...

Nothing could be less true than this. I can imagine no greater falsehood, except perhaps than to state that we do not, and never have existed.

Yes, we do share some beliefs in common. But "belief" in that sense of "believing that lack of oxygen will kill us", or even "murder is bad" there has nothing to do with how we "get there". Get WHERE? For starters. Where on earth do you think we are going?

Suuryaa
04-08-2012, 11:37
Where on earth do you think we are going?

And what do you think?

martpark
04-08-2012, 19:19
I can't call myself an atheist, but I have atheistic tendencies of mind. But when I read this, it struck me that no one could say they are total nonbelievers - they believe that the air they breathe and the water they drink will not kill them, they believe in science, etc.

Those are instincts, not beliefs. Unconditioned responses our bodies have to the environment.

Russian Lad
05-08-2012, 04:50
Originally Posted by rusmeister
Where on earth do you think we are going?
And what do you think?

He has reserveded a seat on the front row of Paradise for himself. All those who don't share his views will perish. That would be a brief summary of his worldview. A cunning old man.

rusmeister
05-08-2012, 08:42
Those are instincts, not beliefs. Unconditioned responses our bodies have to the environment.

I agree on breathing - not on science, though.

As Huxley and others took Darwin's findings and used them to cast doubt on belief in Christian faith, so today it is necessary to use philosophy, reason and logic to cast doubt on a blind belief in science.

martpark
05-08-2012, 13:13
I agree on breathing - not on science, though.

As Huxley and others took Darwin's findings and used them to cast doubt on belief in Christian faith, so today it is necessary to use philosophy, reason and logic to cast doubt on a blind belief in science.

Blind belief has nothing to do with science. Science has to be based on controlled experimentation and observation. Electromagnetism, gravity and evolution occur with or without a scientific explanation. Science is the attempt to explain the universe around us so that it can be explored further or used practically.

Huxley was a self-taught genius and had disagreements with Darwin before accepting his theory. That the religious bigots of their day were turned off by evolution after a debate by Huxley is neither here nor there. Some clergy were actually enthused by the idea.

BTW, no one said anything about science. Do you often conjure up things that are not there?

MickeyTong
05-08-2012, 14:26
Do you often conjure up things that are not there?

Is that not the essence of religious belief?

martpark
05-08-2012, 15:28
Is that not the essence of religious belief?

I thought it was mostly for David Blaine.

Suuryaa
06-08-2012, 12:15
Religion is built on belief, right? What it says can rarely be proven, so people just believe and trust. This is impossible for a doubting mind, and most of us have such a mind. This is why religions are in crisis nowadays, and science flourishes. So, the core thing is the doubting mind.
Now I saw this text which proves that if we doubted everything, we wouldn't be alive because we wouldn't be able to drink or breathe, etc. You don't think "the air I'm going to breathe might contain poison, let me first test it, and then I'll breathe". You have to trust something at least, trust without any proof.
This is why I wrote that we are all believers, because this is the same type of belief that religious people have.
(end of my little philosophical treatise:))

robertmf
06-08-2012, 15:48
Religion is built on belief, right? What it says can rarely be proven, so people just believe and trust. This is impossible for a doubting mind, and most of us have such a mind. This is why religions are in crisis nowadays, and science flourishes. So, the core thing is the doubting mind.
Now I saw this text which proves that if we doubted everything, we wouldn't be alive because we wouldn't be able to drink or breathe, etc. You don't think "the air I'm going to breathe might contain poison, let me first test it, and then I'll breathe". You have to trust something at least, trust without any proof.
This is why I wrote that we are all believers, because this is the same type of belief that religious people have.
(end of my little philosophical treatise:))

:5387: 'this text' you read is flawed and hence so is your conclusion that 'we are all believers'. There is cooperative conscious control of breathing i.e., breathing is not entirely autonomic.

Autonomic nervous system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rusmeister
07-08-2012, 08:08
Blind belief has nothing to do with science. Science has to be based on controlled experimentation and observation. Electromagnetism, gravity and evolution occur with or without a scientific explanation. Science is the attempt to explain the universe around us so that it can be explored further or used practically.

Huxley was a self-taught genius and had disagreements with Darwin before accepting his theory. That the religious bigots of their day were turned off by evolution after a debate by Huxley is neither here nor there. Some clergy were actually enthused by the idea.

BTW, no one said anything about science. Do you often conjure up things that are not there?
???
Suuryaa referenced the air we breathe, etc and you spoke about instinct, and so I referenced science.

There are a couple of lines of response. One is that scientists turn out to be human beings, and bring world views, personal experience and assumptions to their science. They are not cold robots, impersonally doing everything in a vacuum. And they DO blindly believe. We ALL begin thought with, if nothing else, a blind belief in the validity of human reason and the validity of our senses. And we MUST accept our first principles as a matter of faith, for all thinking begins with faith, that what we experience is TRUE. So the scientist brings his hermeneutics to his science, and as soon as he begins to draw conclusions, does so within the framework of his worldview.

Similarly, genuine theology has nothing to do with blind belief. It is founded on acknowledged assumptions. See Aquinas "Summa Theologica" for an apocalyptic treatment of that, the application of reason and thought to the study of what has been accepted. Seminaries actually exist, and actually teach things.

The massive problem of materialists, including people like Huxley, is that they try to use methods of investigating the physical as proof of what constitutes the metaphysical. That is the failure of the person who thinks that science and religion (specifically, Christian religion) are in conflict.

rusmeister
07-08-2012, 08:17
Is that not the essence of religious belief?

No, it is not.

I do not imagine my own sinful state. It is a fact. It is there. (Please reference how I have defined sin here in the past and do not impose the idea of breaking arbitrary rules)

I do not imagine the sin I see all around me. It is a fact 'as practical as potatoes'. I do not conjure up the "Batman" shooter, or drivers who cut me off in traffic (or who I cut off in traffic), or the hundreds of instances that daily confirm that we all sin, and we all die, or that we do not want others to sin against us and do not want to die.

Religion is the attempt to reconcile the paradox of those facts. The faith I have voluntarily chosen does so completely, in the manner of a complex key fitting a complex lock.

The best thing to do, if you wish to both dissent with that, and consider yourself intelligent, is to admit that there IS intelligent faith, and deal with THAT, rather than trying to pretend that all of it is stupid and blind and just "makes stuff up".

rusmeister
07-08-2012, 09:13
“SCIENCE cannot be opposed to truth, for it is no less than a part of truth itself, as discovered in a particular sphere. But those who practice physical science may have a corporate spirit which is warped, opposed to true philosophy and therefore to beauty and goodness. That is exactly what has happened in the development of physical science and of the so-called “scientific” criticism of documents during the last two centuries. The misfortune has happened because the advance in scientific method came after the break-up of Europe and of our common religion. The Process is now reaching its climax in an effort to persuade men against the belief in a beneficent conscious omnipotent Creator, the moral sense and the freedom of the will.”

Suuryaa
07-08-2012, 11:29
One is that scientists turn out to be human beings, and bring world views, personal experience and assumptions to their science. They are not cold robots, impersonally doing everything in a vacuum. And they DO blindly believe. We ALL begin thought with, if nothing else, a blind belief in the validity of human reason and the validity of our senses. And we MUST accept our first principles as a matter of faith, for all thinking begins with faith, that what we experience is TRUE. So the scientist brings his hermeneutics to his science, and as soon as he begins to draw conclusions, does so within the framework of his worldview.


This is exactly what I meant.