Atheism and the nature of faith.

Zennistrad

Faith means believing in something that you don't know is true. Atheists like to point this out a lot in their arguments.

 

What they often overlook is that it's impossible to not have faith to some degree. For every explanation there are even deeper questions, until you go so deep that you can't answer anything.

 

While it can be argued that organized religion is an excess of faith, this is a much harder argument to support without looking like a hypocrite.

 

I honestly hate being an atheist sometimes.

Nyktos

People do have faith in things that aren't religion, yes, but I disagree that it's impossible to not have faith. Even if it is impossible, that doesn't mean minimizing it isn't ideal. (I don't necessarily agree with that, mind.)

Forzare

I mostly just say I don't believe in God and leave it at that.  No need to go into the nature of faith to justify it, I think.

Though, I dunno.  It's easier for me to have faith in things that are scientifically proven (inasmuch as things can be proven) than it is to have faith in a two-thousand year old book that doesn't have any incontrovertible proof.

MillerCross

What they often overlook is that it's impossible to not have faith to some degree. For every explanation there are even deeper questions, until you go so deep that you can't answer anything.

I personally believe that there's a difference between believing in an abstract truth, like, "Science will always find an answer or provide a more believable answer" than believing in an abstract personification such as God.

With that said, I think that, personally, I believe in the idea that faith is not wrong, per se, but putting all of your faith in God, and not in, say, yourself or anything more earthly, can be quite dangerous.

Malkavian

^My faith has always said that God provides the match but you have to light the fire.

In any case, I'm a big fan of science but I've seen a good deal of atheists who adhere to it without actually understanding it, much like the worst christian bible-thumpers and I can't help but see that as an act of blind faith.

vandro

God provides the match but you have to light the fire

PRAISE THE SUN! Sorry, Dark Souls is getting into me.

Bee

^^ Relevant.

And yeah, it does tend to come from people with no idea what kind of limitations science actually has.

Malkavian

Upon reflections 'like the worst bible-thumpers' is probably an exaggeration because while they're assholes I doubt they've murdered anyone for philosophical reasons.

Ironweaver

I'm an agnostic deist. I believe that there is some sort of a metaphysical energy which created the universe, but that we may not know anything about it beyond that (does it interfere, what are its goals etc) and that, thus, following a religion and its tenets makes no sense. I still feel some kind of a sentimental connection to Orthodox Christianity, though.



Sure, religion may be abused for nefarious goals, and so can blind faith be dangerous, just like any other belief system, religious or secular, but faith is fundamentally a beautiful thing that is able to bring hope and a sense of meaning to people. If anything, religion and its mythology stand as a testament to human creativity and force of spirit. The first pieces of art and culture were created for spiritual purposes, and many great monuments of art still continue to. The entire modern value system is built on the teachings of Jesus Christ.



I used to be guilty of it too, but many opponents of religion seem to forget that human nature isn't solely logical, but also emotional and spiritual. I also have a preference for logical, rational thinking as opposed to emotional, but not everyone does. Pure logic, with no emotion, is bad, and I am truly afraid of a possible future society where everyone is Deboss.

Alkthash

I don't see why we need to hold up the emotional side of humanity to empheral and abstract things instead of owning what it is. Or a distinction for spirituality being different enough to warrant it's own category beyond being a subset of different emotions.

It's like I look at all the talk about souls and life and I don't see a definition that has a meaningful difference away from personality and having a pulse. I think that is my fundamental objection to religion is that it is so unnecessary. You don't need to believe is some deity or idea to meet your emotional needs. Nor do you have to exalt the base mechanics of human nature with talk of a soul when those base mechanics are pretty impressive already.

 

But yeah at the end of the day I still have to have something to believe in myself. The only thing I could settle on that was worth a damn for me to believe in was other people and the idea of understanding through observation. Things I can actually interact with, you know?

Icalasari

^^ What happened to Deboss anyways?

CountryPumpkin

I don't see why we need to hold up the emotional side of humanity to empheral and abstract things instead of owning what it is.

It's a scale. You can't be a walking robot but you can't really drown yourself in the ephemera of an emotional or irrational existence. You can obviously be religious and be a good person (and, in fact, technically being religious makes you a good person automatically, so let's not get into that), but not if you use the religion to shield yourself from things you don't like or understand. Like gay people. 

Ironweaver

^^ What happened to Deboss anyways?

He's still posting on TVT.