Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Faith
Dec 23, 2010 23:23:49 GMT -5
Post by Flappy on Dec 23, 2010 23:23:49 GMT -5
Q:What is faith? A:Ignoring probability.
For instance: Is there a god(s)? Probability: 1/2 (there is, or there isn't) Faith: there is. (Faith ignores the probability that there isn't, and tells us that there is.)
discuss.
|
|
|
Faith
Dec 23, 2010 23:59:00 GMT -5
Post by krzych32 on Dec 23, 2010 23:59:00 GMT -5
ok, let me build on that, lets say that you are right and its a 50% 50% situation (what I am about to present is equally valid to matter the %)
Now lets say there are two groups of people, the faithful and the logical. Faithful thru their faith conclude that there is a God. The logical people on the other hand (damn them Canadians) conclude that there is a 50/ 50 chance of God being there, so they actually split into two equal groups, believers and non-believers. For the sake of argument (no but's and if's lets assume that all other things are equal, believers fallow Gods laws while nonbelievers to etc.)
Now lets draw a graph
God exists God doesn't exist
Believer goes to heaven dies and nothing happens
non-believer Goes to hell dies and nothing happens
What this graph presents is that it is better to be a believer, and also it is better to have faith because you have a better chance of becoming a believer. If there is no God, it doesn't matter if you believe or not, it really doesn't change anything. On the other hand even a small possibility of him being out there somewhere is the changing variable, making it safer to have faith then not from clearly scientific perspective.
|
|
|
Faith
Dec 23, 2010 23:59:55 GMT -5
Post by krzych32 on Dec 23, 2010 23:59:55 GMT -5
P.S. just wanted to say I didn't think of this, some philosopher came to this conclusion
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 10:23:10 GMT -5
Post by Flappy on Dec 24, 2010 10:23:10 GMT -5
ok, let me build on that, lets say that you are right and its a 50% 50% situation (what I am about to present is equally valid to matter the %) Now lets say there are two groups of people, the faithful and the logical. Faithful thru their faith conclude that there is a God. The logical people on the other hand (damn them Canadians) conclude that there is a 50/ 50 chance of God being there, so they actually split into two equal groups, believers and non-believers. For the sake of argument (no but's and if's lets assume that all other things are equal, believers fallow Gods laws while nonbelievers to etc.) Now lets draw a graph God exists God doesn't exist Believer goes to heaven dies and nothing happens non-believer Goes to hell dies and nothing happens What this graph presents is that it is better to be a believer, and also it is better to have faith because you have a better chance of becoming a believer. If there is no God, it doesn't matter if you believe or not, it really doesn't change anything. On the other hand even a small possibility of him being out there somewhere is the changing variable, making it safer to have faith then not from clearly scientific perspective. Well yes, that argument would be relatively fair, if the case was that that was the only possible outcome (believe=go to heaven, don't believe=go to hell), however, that isn't the case, and it does not make more sense to believe and be wrong than to not believe and it be true. Also, we're not talking about Christianity here, we're simply talking about faith, all faith, not just Christian faith..
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 14:10:55 GMT -5
Post by Nakor on Dec 24, 2010 14:10:55 GMT -5
Krzych32's argument is called Pascal's Wager, and there are tonnes of sources on the Internet that show why it doesn't really work. A few examples though:
a) Is it moral in the first place for a god to judge you based solely on your belief in it? b) Which god should you have faith in? Get it wrong and you're just as screwed. c) The wager doesn't take into account the odds of there being a god, which are not necessarily 50/50. d) The wager doesn't take into account the possible effects of having unwarranted faith in this life.
And speaking of 50/50, I know it was just used as a random example in this thread, but I'd be careful about calling it that. I'd place the odds far, far lower such as to be negligible and other people would place them elsewhere. The odds of a thing being true for which we have absolutely no data (not talking about god here, but rather in general) are negligibly low, and so the odds of a thing existing or not typically start extremely close to 0 and are raised by positive evidence and lowered by negative. So 50/50 is very, very rarely a good estimate.
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 18:37:01 GMT -5
Post by Flappy on Dec 24, 2010 18:37:01 GMT -5
Krzych32's argument is called Pascal's Wager Yeah, totally forgot. Thanks. Yeah, I know, it probably isn't 50/50, I was just using that as an example. Yeah. I actually think it's somewhere around 80/20 or something like that. I mean, we already know that a god doesn't need to exist, so...
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 19:30:29 GMT -5
Post by Nakor on Dec 24, 2010 19:30:29 GMT -5
No worries, I wasn't trying to call you out or anything. It's just that I've heard it seriously toted about as the odds before that when I saw them used as an example I thought I'd throw in a disclaimer, that's all.
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 19:36:41 GMT -5
Post by Flappy on Dec 24, 2010 19:36:41 GMT -5
Oh no, no, I didn't take offense to ir at all. I was actually hoping my response wouldn't come off as rude. It didn't, did it?
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Faith
Dec 24, 2010 22:05:53 GMT -5
Post by Nakor on Dec 24, 2010 22:05:53 GMT -5
Not at all. Apparently we both need to quit worrying about offending each other. XD
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Faith
Dec 25, 2010 1:58:39 GMT -5
Post by Flappy on Dec 25, 2010 1:58:39 GMT -5
Lol, yeah.
|
|
|
Faith
Dec 25, 2010 2:53:53 GMT -5
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Dec 25, 2010 2:53:53 GMT -5
Faith is ignoring rational thought, whatever the probability, and believing in something that doesn't have any scientific evidence. Regarding religion, anecdotal accounts are enough evidence for people if they "know in their heart" that there is a God.
That's my understanding, although I'd like to hear it from a religious person themself.
|
|
|
Faith
Dec 26, 2010 0:47:34 GMT -5
Post by stephen5000 on Dec 26, 2010 0:47:34 GMT -5
There must be more to faith than just ignoring probability (if that). Most people ignore probabilities all the time. Especially when it comes to things like safety or gambling. I guess people have preconceived notions or desires that trump rational thought. These concepts may or may not contribute to a person's faith.
I think it does depend on the person, though. Sometimes faith is just hope or tradition.
|
|