Atheists are my brothers and sisters of a different faith...

Saffron

Just for fun and to stir the pot, a quote from Life of Pi by Yann Martel:

“Atheists are my brothers and sisters of a different faith, and every word they speak, speaks of faith. Like me, they go as far as the legs of reason will carry them – and then they leap” (35).

Interbane · Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject:

This is true, but with regards to the distance of the leap, the faith of a theist is in a different class all together compared to an atheist.

President Camacho · Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:15 pm Post subject:

yeah, one leaps into logical probability and the other leaps into never never land.

geo

Interbane · Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject:

geo: "The atheistic position simply doesn't accept things based that are based on faith. It's an opposite position, not a collateral position."

There's a lot of baggage with the word 'faith', but that shouldn't repel you from the idea that all people must have at least a little faith. I distinguish religious Faith from simple faith(such as faith in our senses) for this reason. Having faith without first using critical thinking and reasoning skills is folly, and that is the position monotheisms ask you to take.

geo · Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:45 pm Post subject:

Interbane · Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:31 pm Post subject:

geo: "It has been suggested that our whole existence might be some grand computer simulation concocted by aliens, but there's absolutely no evidence for this, and I think to accept it would be relying on faith."

I thought of this on my own as a plot for a story, a video game rather than a simulation. Same thing really. I assume there's thousands of variations of this idea from thousands of people. It's irrefutable if posed correctly. The Faith of the religious is the same 'giant leap' that someone with faith in the alien dream would take.

We wouldn't be communicating on this forum if science wasn't extremely effective at uncovering the truth.

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:41 am Post subject:

geo: There is "faith" involved in trusting that the image of the tree we see with our eyes is actually a tree.

I think there is a faith involved in trusting our senses: a hope and risk that they are not deceived or deceiving...that they are reliable and trustworthy.

But I think the meaning of faith that is most meaningful involves a different combination of concerns. In other words, using your example, faith would be the glue that binds together the mixture of values and principles which make the tree meaningful: this binding process brings that tree into a universe of purpose, oughts, and hopes. The tree is no longer an individual random piece of incoherent and meaningless data: it finds its place and is imparted a coherent role in a larger narrative and drama...and I think this is largely a matter of faith.

Interbane · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 3:24 pm Post subject:

DH: "faith would be the glue that binds together the mixture of values and principles which make the tree meaningful: this binding process brings that tree into a universe of purpose, oughts, and hopes."

A tree is meaningful for purposes that can be explained rationally. There is no faith required. A tree is beautiful in that it starts as a seed with all necessary information to turn it into a behemoth. It changes it's form depending on concentrations of moisture and nitrogen in the soil, and the shadows of it's ancestors above. After all our findings on how the tree works and it's part in the symphony of the forest, which can be understood on the micro level, yet is beautiful on the macro level, we can both understand how it works without the faith you propose, and admire it's beauty in a similar fashion.

To say that faith is required to find meaning is to unnecessarily obscure that which is beautiful without obscurity. You also blur the boundaries of identity by posing the tree as an entity that has hopes and oughts.

Saffron · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 3:34 pm Post subject:

I think what the quote was getting at and everyone missed is that the leap of faith is in how each group answers the larger question of what it all means. No human being knows the answer to the biggest question of all -- what does life mean and if you will allow another version of the question -- why are we here with brains that can think? Any answer you can come up with is a leap of faith; in that there is no way to verify or prove your answer.

Interbane · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 3:55 pm Post subject:

Saffron: "Any answer you can come up with is a leap of faith; in that there is no way to verify or prove your answer."

What makes you think an answer is necessary? I don't have an answer. I leave the question wide open, and approach new information curiously, like a child. If you think you know an answer to lifes larger questions, then faith is required, but prior to taking the leap of faith, reasoning and critical thinking should come first. The more of a base of reasoning and critical thinking, the less distance you leap when you take the leap of faith.

Saffron · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject:

Interbane · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:03 pm Post subject:

Saffron: "I don't think an answer is necessary, but by declaring yourself an atheists you make at least a partial answer."

What is my partial answer?

That I don't believe in santa claus, that I don't believe in the easter bunny, that I don't believe in the flying spaghetti monster, that I don't believe in a;lskdfjas;ldiufqwope?

Not believing in something is not a partial answer. It is the lack of an answer. There is no affirmative.

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject:

Interbane: A tree is beautiful in that it starts as a seed with all necessary information to turn it into a behemoth. It changes it's form depending on concentrations of moisture and nitrogen in the soil, and the shadows of it's ancestors above. After all our findings on how the tree works and it's part in the symphony of the forest, which can be understood on the micro level, yet is beautiful on the macro level, we can both understand how it works without the faith you propose, and admire it's beauty in a similar fashion.

This is an asthetic assertion, a rather nice one too...but it is hardly a rational argument for why a tree is beautiful...it is a poetic flush of ecological statements, assembled together to help support your particular aesthetic taste...it may compelling as a kind of symphonic elucidation of forest facts and tree truths...but it is not a rational argument.

Interbane: You also blur the boundaries of identity by posing the tree as an entity that has hopes and oughts.

I wasn't positing a tree with hopes and oughts, but stating that once the fact "there is a tree" enters into our larger worldview of principles, hopes and oughts...then we have entered the realm of faith. What ought we do with this tree, what do we hope for it...the "so what" about the tree...is not answered by simply piling up all the facts about it that we can gather through the scientific method.

Chris OConnor · Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject:

The question, "What is the meaning of life?" is meaningless. There is no meaning to life just like their is no meaning to a rock.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT