EPISTEMOLOGY: The Key to Everything

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
321

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

No reason is not dependent on faith its operates with assumptions but those are not the same as religious faith , or your faith that Christ is your redeemer. You can’t not prove it you accept it on faith. In the context of arguing using reasons, I can be persuaded to give a belief up to change my mind, but your belief in Christ is something you will never give up no matter what one tells you. That is religious belief. Because that particular religious conviction organizes your life. And while a man of science might not give up his belief in Einsteins theories, he could if certain things prove it to be faulty or inadequate in explaining natural forces in nature. But for a religious man that is no option.
As for the religious person, I feel its not enough to say, " i love Christ" I think that religious person has to exemplify that. Like Mother Tessa did, in other words though good works towards others and the earth we live on.

322

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

While that may be true, there are so many different types of faith (not just religious) that can be called on to serve the purpose of being the bedrock. And yes, I have read this whole thread and the vast majority of others of its ilk on here. And elsewhere.
[/quote]Example?

323

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

Reasoning is not based on faith, it is not even close to being the same. Faith is literally believing in something without any evidence to support it. The whole point of faith is that you believe in something in spite of the lack of evidence.

Reasoning on the other hand is not the wilful ignorance of a lack of facts, but rather the only tool we have to make sense of our experiences and gain knowledge. How is 2+2=4 dependent on faith???

324

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

While that may be true, there are so many different types of faith (not just religious) that can be called on to serve the purpose of being the bedrock. And yes, I have read this whole thread and the vast majority of others of its ilk on here. And elsewhere.
[/quote]Example?
[/quote]

Faith is really just an unquestioned trust in someone or something, humans display that in many respects, not just religon. Faith is not owned by religon.

325

[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

While that may be true, there are so many different types of faith (not just religious) that can be called on to serve the purpose of being the bedrock. And yes, I have read this whole thread and the vast majority of others of its ilk on here. And elsewhere.
[/quote]Example?
[/quote]

Faith is really just an unquestioned trust in someone or something, humans display that in many respects, not just religon. Faith is not owned by religon.[/quote]Stick around bub.

326

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

While that may be true, there are so many different types of faith (not just religious) that can be called on to serve the purpose of being the bedrock. And yes, I have read this whole thread and the vast majority of others of its ilk on here. And elsewhere.
[/quote]Example?
[/quote]

Of what? Another faith system? Pick one.

327

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]silee wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]silee wrote:
So according to your thinking Bro chris, you think faith and reason are interchangeable?

well a part of modern philosophy as I understand it has to do with Ordinary language philosophy. Here they the philosophers of ordinary language are looking at how language is used, and so it relies on context. . The notion of common sense is itself problematic, who’s everyday sense and in favor of what?
[/quote]

I’m not Chris, but I’ll offer my answer. I’m going to sound like Tirib here, but, until you figure out what it is you are basing your reason on, you are on just as firm ground as you are with “faith.” Exactly the same ground, in fact.

Plato’s cave dwellers thought they knew everything there was to know about the shadows they saw dancing upon the wall of their little universe, too. Their reason, and the information they had available to themselves along with the assumptions they made from that information, led them to “know” what they knew.
[/quote]

Well yes, if your basing your reasons on a “house of cards” or another questionable set of reasons that don’t hold up then I can see your point about faith/reason. My understanding of faith is " you believe without reasons to support your belief".
[/quote]

Your understanding is incorrect. Why on earth would you believe such a silly notion? I’m not being facetious. What arrogance. Are you to tell me that you honestly assume that ALL Christians and everyone else who is even the slightest bit religious are nothing more than mind-numbed automatons blindly following what they’ve been told, never stopping to think about why it may or may not be so?

Atheists believe everything came from…well, nothing. And WE are the ridiculous ones.

All of your precious science will look as much like religion to people 300 years from now as our beliefs do to you. Or I’m wrong, and you’ve got it all figured out. Yeah.

If anything, you guys, the Christian one’s too, would do well to spend at least a month or so reading through the posts here before you come in with your haughty drive-by “wisdom.” It’d save a bunch of eggs.

[/quote]YEAH!!! What Cortes said. I concur pretty much down the line here.
[/quote]

Wrong, atheists do not believe everything came from nothing (which is not as different from the God you believe in as you may think), they state that it currently unknown and refuse to put it down to a mythical god. God used to be the personification of the essential unknown but was twisted into a method of control. There is no justifiable reason to have faith in a God (faith, not belief).

The key thing is the fact that religous people will force others to conform with their beliefs, which is why religoun is scrutinised more than science. Science hypothesises a big bang, religon asserts a God, and furthermore, says you should live your life in deference to this belief.

328

Isn’t that exactly what faith is, unwavering belief in something in spite of all doubts. How do christians think about why it may or may not be the case that God exists?

329

[quote]silee wrote:
Seems to me like you are using faith in different senses. " Faith pertains to religious convictions. And there we have faith because no convincing proof can be given so we " take it on faith". That’s has a differences that taking things in our everyday exist for granted doesn’t have. I take it for granted that when I drive to the store I will not have a problem with my car. I could have a problem and if i to i can say, I just assumed it would be ok. Its not like I hold to some religious dogma that can’t be proven but only taken on faith.

I think that’s what you confuse, assumption with faith, and I see a difference.

And I wouldn’t never hold that the use of faith in a religious context means one can’t reason about things, but it shows a limitation of reason for the believer.

I don’t know if I got you right. Sometimes we don’t know exactly what we are saying until we’ve said it. [/quote]

Like the Church, I like when someone disagrees with me because I can clarify. So, please continue. :slight_smile:

In reference of Dogmas (Catholic?), they are above HUMAN reasoning, not above reasoning. They are not unreasonable or out of reason, meaning that if you were had the ability to, you could give a logical argument for those beliefs.

I can’t speak for others, because some don’t want to actually explain what they believe, but the reason why Catholics say faith and reason (compared to either faith or reason) is because our Faith (or Deposit of Faith, Divine Revelation) does not go against reason.

However, if you are talking about the theological virtue of faith, there is a distinction between that and the Deposit of Faith.

Anyway, continue.

BC

330

[quote]silee wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

No reason is not dependent on faith its operates with assumptions but those are not the same as religious faith , or your faith that Christ is your redeemer. You can’t not prove it you accept it on faith. In the context of arguing using reasons, I can be persuaded to give a belief up to change my mind, but your belief in Christ is something you will never give up no matter what one tells you. That is religious belief. Because that particular religious conviction organizes your life. And while a man of science might not give up his belief in Einsteins theories, he could if certain things prove it to be faulty or inadequate in explaining natural forces in nature. But for a religious man that is no option.
As for the religious person, I feel its not enough to say, " i love Christ" I think that religious person has to exemplify that. Like Mother Tessa did, in other words though good works towards others and the earth we live on.
[/quote]

I’ve seen one or two men of faith give up a belief based on persuasion.

331

[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:
Reasoning is not based on faith, it is not even close to being the same. Faith is literally believing in something without any evidence to support it. The whole point of faith is that you believe in something in spite of the lack of evidence. [/quote]

That may be true in some circumstances, but that’s not the actual definition of faith.

I’m assuming you’re talking about the virtue of faith:
“Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because he is truth itself. By faith “man freely commits his entire self to God.” For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God’s will. “The righteous shall live by faith.” Living faith “work[s] through charity.”” (CCC 1814)

Though some may believe with no evidence, that is not the case. And, further I do believe that most Christians have a reason for their beliefs. Even if it is sentimental.

Anyway, regards.

BC

332

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]silee wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Human reason is entirely, universally and comprehensively dependent upon faith, for saints and sinners alike, for the reasons I gave to Ephrem above. It will never EVER be otherwise. I feel another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here.[/quote]

No reason is not dependent on faith its operates with assumptions but those are not the same as religious faith , or your faith that Christ is your redeemer. You can’t not prove it you accept it on faith. In the context of arguing using reasons, I can be persuaded to give a belief up to change my mind, but your belief in Christ is something you will never give up no matter what one tells you. That is religious belief. Because that particular religious conviction organizes your life. And while a man of science might not give up his belief in Einsteins theories, he could if certain things prove it to be faulty or inadequate in explaining natural forces in nature. But for a religious man that is no option.
As for the religious person, I feel its not enough to say, " i love Christ" I think that religious person has to exemplify that. Like Mother Tessa did, in other words though good works towards others and the earth we live on.
[/quote]

I’ve seen one or two men of faith give up a belief based on persuasion. [/quote]

Did they go from believing in God to becoming agnostic oe atheist? You say they did it based on persuasion, do you mean life experience or do you mean they were convinced by someone?

btw, sorry for butting into the thread and commenting but I find these topics absolutely fascinating, especially coming from a religous culture and family but being very secular myself.

333

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Like the Church, I like when someone disagrees with me because I can clarify. So, please continue. :slight_smile:

In reference of Dogmas (Catholic?), they are above HUMAN reasoning, not above reasoning. They are not unreasonable or out of reason, meaning that if you were had the ability to, you could give a logical argument for those beliefs.[/quote]

You can justify ANYTHING by saying it’s “above human reasoning.”

Even if we assume what you say is correct and it is “above human reasoning” how the fuck could you possibly know that? By your own admission you can’t see the rationality in those beliefs since you are a human and only capable of human reasoning.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

I can’t speak for others, because some don’t want to actually explain what they believe, but the reason why Catholics say faith and reason (compared to either faith or reason) is because our Faith (or Deposit of Faith, Divine Revelation) does not go against reason.

However, if you are talking about the theological virtue of faith, there is a distinction between that and the Deposit of Faith.

Anyway, continue.

BC[/quote]

There is absolutely no conclusive evidence for any the divinity claims the Bible makes. Therefore your beliefs are unreasonable.

334

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:
Reasoning is not based on faith, it is not even close to being the same. Faith is literally believing in something without any evidence to support it. The whole point of faith is that you believe in something in spite of the lack of evidence. [/quote]

That may be true in some circumstances, but that’s not the actual definition of faith.

I’m assuming you’re talking about the virtue of faith:
“Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because he is truth itself. By faith “man freely commits his entire self to God.” For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God’s will. “The righteous shall live by faith.” Living faith “work[s] through charity.”” (CCC 1814)

Though some may believe with no evidence, that is not the case. And, further I do believe that most Christians have a reason for their beliefs. Even if it is sentimental.

Anyway, regards.

BC[/quote]

Sorry, you are right, faith isn’t defined by a lack of evidence amnd I can see how the term you have given faith as a strong belief/trust rather than belief without evidence, which is also a definition of the common term.

I think i am right that faith does not require any evidence as it is an unconditional belief, and furthermore that there is no evidence for it. I agree people have their own reasons for accepting religon, including sentimental value, comfort etc but I would point out a reason is not evidence.

335

What’s an example of a Dogma in the context you are speaking about?

336

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

That may be true in some circumstances, but that’s not the actual definition of faith.

I’m assuming you’re talking about the virtue of faith:
“Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because he is truth itself. By faith “man freely commits his entire self to God.” For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God’s will. “The righteous shall live by faith.” Living faith “work[s] through charity.”” (CCC 1814) [/quote]

This has nothing to do with anything. I and most atheists reject the idea that faith is a virtue. We really should get back to the definition of faith.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Though some may believe with no evidence, that is not the case. And, further I do believe that most Christians have a reason for their beliefs. Even if it is sentimental.

Anyway, regards.

BC[/quote]

Accepting claims for their sentimental value is the exact opposite of reasonable.

337

[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:
Reasoning is not based on faith, it is not even close to being the same. Faith is literally believing in something without any evidence to support it. The whole point of faith is that you believe in something in spite of the lack of evidence. [/quote]

That may be true in some circumstances, but that’s not the actual definition of faith.

I’m assuming you’re talking about the virtue of faith:
“Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because he is truth itself. By faith “man freely commits his entire self to God.” For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God’s will. “The righteous shall live by faith.” Living faith “work[s] through charity.”” (CCC 1814)

Though some may believe with no evidence, that is not the case. And, further I do believe that most Christians have a reason for their beliefs. Even if it is sentimental.

Anyway, regards.

BC[/quote]

Sorry, you are right, faith isn’t defined by a lack of evidence amnd I can see how the term you have given faith as a strong belief/trust rather than belief without evidence, which is also a definition of the common term.

I think i am right that faith does not require any evidence as it is an unconditional belief, and furthermore that there is no evidence for it. I agree people have their own reasons for accepting religon, including sentimental value, comfort etc but I would point out a reason is not evidence.[/quote]

faith in terms of religion: the acceptance of a claim without evidence or evidence to the contrary.

338

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:[/quote]Example?[quote]Neuromancer wrote: Of what? Another faith system? Pick one.[/quote]No, you pick one. YOU made the claim. Define “purpose” and “bedrock” and give me an example of a system of thought that serves the “purpose” of providing “bedrock” for thought. If you would please. Kamui has still come the closest.[quote]Scorched Soul wrote:<<< atheists <<<>>> state that it currently unknown and refuse to put it down to a mythical god. >>>[/quote]I definitely see another 2+2=4 dialog comin on here. It still works the best after all.

339

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Of course, because we wouldn’t exist. What is your point?

Or, are you saying that we can’t know anything without having the Christian faith? Yes, every fact testifies of his majesty, he is the creator of everything, even our free will and our free will testifies to a God. That is called final causality. [/quote]See my quote about the two natures to Ephrem please Chris.

340

I have just scanned your argument Brother Chris and it seems you are saying faith is as good as reason as both are unproven.

Reasoning is rooted in logic, which does is not a belief system in itself instead it is a description of how we can come to know things and how knowledge of one thing can be applied to another. These rules are said to be self evident, which is not the same as religous faith.