There are some things we take so completely on faith that we have great trouble even realizing that we are making an assumption. For example, when I open my eyes, I take it on faith that I am seeing an actual physical universe, and not simply recording impulses that my eyes forwarded to my brain which then refined them, etc.
But religious faith is not at all like that. Religious people often have to fight doubts --they often have to attend weekly meetings where they chant or sing or pray or perform rituals to keep their faith --they may hear sermons on the dangers of backsliding, etc. ________________________________________ From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [friam-boun...@redfish.com] on behalf of Nicholas Thompson [nickthomp...@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:29 AM To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith If it is true that, "Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle "can" take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it "will"" Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -----Original Message----- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. "Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle "can" take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it "will"" On 9/24/12, Nicholas Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: > Russ, > > I take your point, but still, I would have a hard time composing a > sentence of the form, " Russ has faith in X but he doesn't believe in > it." Can you compose such a sentence for me? > > N > > > > From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On > Behalf Of Russ Abbott > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:42 AM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith > > > > Nick, > > > > As I understand your position the words "faith" and "belief" are synonyms. > I > would prefer a definition for "faith" that distinguishes it from "belief." > > > > Tory, > > > > Thanks for you comment on my posts. I'm glad you enjoy them. > > > > My definition of faith makes use of the notion of the everyday world. > But I'm not saying that the everyday world is the same for everyone. > Your everyday world may be different from mine. I'm just saying that > believing that the world will continue to conform to your sense of > what the everyday world is like is not faith; it's simple belief. > > > > Eric, > > > > I would take "having faith in something" in the colloquial sense as > different from "faith" in a religious context, which is what I was > focusing on. > > > > > -- Russ > > > > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Victoria Hughes > <victo...@toryhughes.com> > wrote: > > > > Russ wrote, in part- > > > > Faith, I would say (in fact I did earlier) > > > > > > is believing something that one wouldn't otherwise believe without faith. > > > > > > Believing that the everyday world is the everyday world > > > > > > doesn't seem to me to require faith. > > > > Russ, with all due respect for the enjoyment I get from your posts, I > find this suspiciously tautological. > > > > Who are you to define for the rest of humanity (and other sentient > life > forms) what 'the everyday world' incorporates? Numerous 'for instance' > cases > can immediately be made here. All you can do is define what you > believe for yourself. You cannot extrapolate what is defensible for > others to believe, from your own beliefs. > > > > And this statement ' Faith is believing something that one wouldn't > believe without faith'. Hm and hm again. > > > > Eagleman's new book Incognito > <http://www.amazon.com/Incognito-Secret-Lives-David-Eagleman/dp/030738 > 9928/r > ef=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348460523&sr=1-1&keywords=incognito+by+ > david+ > eagleman> offers fruitful information from recent neuroscience that > eagleman> may > interest others on this list. His ultimate sections bring up hard > questions about legal and ethical issues in the face of the myriad 'zombie programs' > that run most of our behaviour. This looks like - but is not as > simplistic as - 'yet another pop science book.' > > > > A review David Eagleman's > <http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2011/06/david_eaglem > ans.ht > ml> "Incognito" - Brainiac > > > > Tory > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe > at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at > http://www.friam.org > > > > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
