Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-02-2014, 09:53 AM
Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(24-02-2014 09:40 AM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  
(24-02-2014 03:09 AM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  That's bullshit philosophy.Hmm... This sounds an awful lot like "Jagat mithya,Brahma Satyam" which means that the world around you(including you) is an illusion and that only Brahma is the truth.

I personally think that there's only one illusion in your entire life and that illusion is something called "RELIGION".

Good for you. Maybe you can take your grievances up with a Buddhist, and you can cry-hug it better.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2014, 11:04 AM
Re: RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(24-02-2014 06:46 AM)donotwant Wrote:  
(24-02-2014 06:28 AM)lamexcuses Wrote:  Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a conjecture or premise to be true.
Faith is necessarily a belief that is not based on proof.
So I don't think true believers really need reassurance. They congregate because they just follow what they believe in.

I would say people who need reassurance doubt their beliefs (theists or atheists but most of the times theists) and need some kind of external support to make themselves blindly (in case of theists) believe in it again.

In my opinion one cannot correlate blind faith with need for congregation. The said need is a need in itself which is very basic to all human beings.

We atheists are doing somewhat similar (though not exactly the same) on this forum. But this stems from the need to be with like minded people and not reassurance and certainly not blind faith.

Question: how would you differentiate between faith and blind faith?

Also it was interesting to see how a nice thread became a platform for discussing Buddhism.

The blindness of faith is measured by the amount in which evidence support or contradict it.
If no evidence support the belief then it is blind. If evidence CONTRADICT the belief and it doesn't go away it's FUCKING BLIND. I think that was good enough.

If you believe my dog is a robot it's a blind faith. If you believe my dog is a robot after it died and got creamted in front of your eyes it's FUCKING BLIND faith.

I am sorry but I have to say this.

I can't stand it when people use the words belief and faith as synonyms.

Belief is the confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous truth. So individual beliefs change but they are based on empirical evidence which the believer has. Beliefs are mental constructs with some rational base. Atheists 'believe' that god is non existent.

Faith is believing in something without proof. So if you believe in something without any proof (like in case of god) it is called faith. The person who believes in god cannot substantiate his claim in a rational manner but still he chooses to believe. That is called faith. Theists have 'faith' in god.

So I would go ahead and say that faith is necessarily blind (or fucking blind). Always. One can consciously be aware of this blind faith and still choose to believe or one may never question himself and have faith which is fucking blind too. But my point is it is always blind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2014, 12:29 PM (This post was last modified: 24-02-2014 12:57 PM by IndianAtheist.)
RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(24-02-2014 06:28 AM)lamexcuses Wrote:  So I don't think true believers really need reassurance. They congregate because they just follow what they believe in.
If they don't need constant reassurance then why don't normal people like us also go to a special place every now and then just to constantly reassure already established facts like gravity&chemical elements?

If theists have read their religious books cover to cover and know for a fact that their particular God exists why do they need to go to special places and read the same book over and over? why do they need other people for to read them their books if they already know that book cover to cover?

Scientists only congregate to discover new things theists don't congregate to discover anything new they merely want to cement their faith&establish their sense of belonging to a community that is based on blind faith.
Quote:But this stems from the need to be with like minded people and not reassurance and certainly not blind faith.
Nah.. if they only needed to be with like minded people then they would just go to normal social places to discuss those things there's no need for a special place to talk about already established facts.

Why else do theists keep repeating like robots that "God is good" "God loves you"?

When was the last time you've seen someone say "Einstein's words are 100% legit scientific proofs!"?

If God&God's nature is so "Self-evident" and obvious as theists really say it is then why do they feel the need to go to a place and constantly repeat already established facts?

Its like going around and saying "Light exists and its a self-evident Fact!" its silly and pointless.. unless you yourself are not sure whether light actually exists or notConsider

When i was a theist i remember how going to holy places was the norm and it was even more important for staunch believers and yet no one knew exactly why they needed to do that.
Quote:Question: how would you differentiate between faith and blind faith?
Faith is basically believing in something without direct evidence it can either be reasonable or irrational.

Reasonable faith is something like when you buy the prescribed medicines even though you don't know what they exactly are you just have to have faith that doctor didn't screw with you.

Blind faith something like when you believe that a stranger will fall in love with you just because you read so in the newspaper horoscope Facepalm

Dreams/Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence
Wishful thinking is not evidence
Disproved statements&Illogical conclusions are not evidence
Logical fallacies&Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence
Vague prophecies is not evidence
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2014, 01:15 PM (This post was last modified: 24-02-2014 01:26 PM by lamexcuses.)
Re: RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(24-02-2014 12:29 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
(24-02-2014 06:28 AM)lamexcuses Wrote:  So I don't think true believers really need reassurance. They congregate because they just follow what they believe in.
If they don't need constant reassurance then why don't normal people like us also go to a special place every now and then just to constantly reassure already established facts like gravity&chemical elements?

If theists have read their religious books cover to cover and know for a fact that their particular God exists why do they need to go to special places and read the same book over and over? why do they need other people for to read them their books if they already know that book cover to cover?

Scientists only congregate to discover new things theists don't congregate to discover anything new they merely want to cement their faith&establish their sense of belonging to a community that is based on blind faith.

Quote:But this stems from the need to be with like minded people and not reassurance and certainly not blind faith.
Nah.. if they only need to be with like minded people then they would just go to normal social places to discuss those things there's no need for a special place to talk about already established facts.

Why else do theists keep repeating like robots that "God is good" "God loves you"?

When was the last time you've seen someone say "Einstein's words are 100% legit scientific proofs!"?

If God&God's nature is so "Self-evident" and obvious as theists really say it is then why do they feel the need to go to a place and constantly repeat already established facts?

Its like going around and saying "Light exists and its a self-evident Fact!" its silly and pointless.. unless you yourself are not sure whether light actually exists or notConsider

When i was a theist i remember how going to holy places was the norm and it was even more important for staunch believers and yet no one knew exactly why they needed to do that.

Quote:Question: how would you differentiate between faith and blind faith?
Faith is basically believing in something without direct evidence it can either be reasonable or irrational.

Reasonable faith is something like when you buy the prescribed medicines even though you don't know what they exactly are you just have to have faith that doctor didn't screw with you.

Blind faith something like when you believe that a stranger will fall in love with you just because you read so in the newspaper horoscope Facepalm


For 1st quote - I am not denying the need for reassurance here. I am just denying that a true theist has this need.

A person who really has faith in god and his religion wouldn't have any doubts in the first place so he would never need any reassurance. He knows the so called religious books cover to cover and he is following what is written therein by re-reading them on some special occasion or periodically (I don't know how it works exactly. I was born in an atheist family so never really learned about religions)

Again I will repeat that the need for reassurance arises when there is doubt. Theists or atheists doesn't matter.

Scientist won't congregate to repeat already established ideas because there isn't any doubt about those ideas in there head. It is already proven. But they would congregate to solve something unfinished or an idea which needs refinement and which cannot be proven just yet.

So to conclude.. In my opinion the need for reassurance arises when there is doubt in the mind. If a theist doubts himself then I wouldn't call him a theist just like I wouldn't call an atheist an atheist if he doubts himself. One should pick a side. If you are in the middle you don't belong anywhere and then you need reassurance. It may be true that most of these middlemen are publicly theists today and your statement is true for them. They seek reassurance by congregation and re-reading of religious books. But you see.. My problem is I don't really consider them theists. They are just people trapped in the middle. Their life is darker than any real theist.


For 2nd quote - Umm.. Actually if you read what I said in the context in which it was intended, you would see that I was talking about atheists coming together on this forum. Which I think is true and then the quoted sentences make sense. Our coming together here is not based on reassurance or blind faith. This is just like minded people coming together.

Anyways.. I think we are saying the same thing here. You yourself said that "... Unless you yourself are not sure whether light exists or not"

Correlating reassurance with doubt. Thumbsup.


For last one - Wow.. Just wow.. Very nice differentiation. I was not able to do it myself. I used to feel faith is necessarily blind. I was wrong. What you said makes sense and thanks for the new perspective.

Note- I am not able to quote you and reply to specific responses for some reason. So I had to do this. Please bear with me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2014, 10:46 PM
RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(24-02-2014 01:15 PM)lamexcuses Wrote:  I am not denying the need for reassurance here. I am just denying that a true theist has this need.
I don't know what is a "True" theist but i guess you're referring to more conservative theists but they too go to special places for worship.
Quote:A person who really has faith in god and his religion wouldn't have any doubts in the first place so he would never need any reassurance.
The problem here is that they have faith in something which has 0% basis in reality they have to make themselves seem like it really has some basis in reality.. thus the need for special social gatherings,constant prayers,rituals,recitals of already established "Facts" etc etc

They sub-consciously realize that they have 0% logical reason to believe in the supernatural and they're just in sheer denial of their own cognitive processes its sad actually.
Quote:Again I will repeat that the need for reassurance arises when there is doubt.
I don't think they need reassurance just because they have doubt.. it just so happens that their beliefs are not based on anything real hence the sub-conscious need for reassurance.

On a sidenote i still don't know whether Buddhism is faith based or not,most of its philosophy seems to deal with spirituality so its most likely faith based.

Quoting is easy just manually type [/quote] at the end of the paragraph you want to quote.

Dreams/Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence
Wishful thinking is not evidence
Disproved statements&Illogical conclusions are not evidence
Logical fallacies&Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence
Vague prophecies is not evidence
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2014, 12:03 AM (This post was last modified: 25-02-2014 12:06 AM by lamexcuses.)
Re: RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
Quote:I don't know what is a "True" theist but i guess you're referring to more conservative theists but they too go to special places for worship.

No. I wasn't referring to conservative theist. By true theist I meant a theist by definition. I think going to these special places is not a need for these people but it is a ritual which they follow. It comes along with their religion. They just do it like robots. If their religion would have said don't go to special places and drink alcohol everyday they would have done it with equal amount of faith.

Quote:The problem here is that they have faith in something which has 0% basis in reality they have to make themselves seem like it really has some basis in reality.. thus the need for special social gatherings,constant prayers,rituals,recitals of already established "Facts" etc etc

They sub-consciously realize that they have 0% logical reason to believe in the supernatural and they're just in sheer denial of their own cognitive processes its sad actually.

I accept your premise that if someone subconsciously realises the futility of their faith in god they would require reassurance. But I don't think a theist by definition (who really has faith and has accepted the idea of god and religion completely) subconsciously realises this fact. A theist would either consciously realise or he wouldn't realise at all. If he hasn't realised then the question of reassurance doesn't even arise. And if he consciously realises and still chooses to be a theist then it just makes his faith stronger.

But if you are saying that the founders(?) of these religions were able to foresee that such congregation and recitals would prevent the transformation of a theist doubting his faith and they intentionally tried to build in rituals or processes to lure the weak minded people to follow religions then that would be interesting. And I would agree with you there.

Quote:I don't think they need reassurance just because they have doubt.. it just so happens that their beliefs are not based on anything real hence the sub-conscious need for reassurance.

Are you saying they subconsciously know that their beliefs are not based on empirical evidence? If that's the case then they subconsciously doubt themselves. But doubt has to be there and if it is there then that person isn't a true theist because he is lacks faith. A true theist has faith.

Quote:On a sidenote i still don't know whether Buddhism is faith based or not,most of its philosophy seems to deal with spirituality so its most likely faith based.

Umm..I don't know much about Buddhism but I think it is based on non theism. But if it advocates some other things which cannot be proven scientifically then again it becomes faith based......

amirite??

And thanks.. It seems I was not typing the "/"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2014, 03:30 PM
RE: Is it a mere coincidence that all religions are Faith based
(25-02-2014 12:03 AM)lamexcuses Wrote:  I think going to these special places is not a need for these people but it is a ritual which they follow. They just do it like robots.
why else would they follow rituals which are so meaningless? there's no other purpose to these rituals than to strengthen their faith.

Faith will be eroded unless they can back up their faith with something.. faith alone cannot do anything,faith is like a paper tiger secured by the rope of denial and confirmation bias.
Quote:But if you are saying that the founders(?) of these religions were able to foresee that such congregation and recitals would prevent the transformation of a theist doubting his faith and they intentionally tried to build in rituals or processes to lure the weak minded people to follow religions then that would be interesting.
Exactly most God based religions are just built on a pack of unjustified lies and the system ensures that their practitioners don't lose their faith.

Have you ever wonder how strangely enough theists seem to be perfectly able to use logic&reason in daily life but they never seem to question their own faith which is so illogical&irrational.
Quote:Are you saying they subconsciously know that their beliefs are not based on empirical evidence?
Most of the honest theists admit that faith is all they have.

Dreams/Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence
Wishful thinking is not evidence
Disproved statements&Illogical conclusions are not evidence
Logical fallacies&Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence
Vague prophecies is not evidence
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: