Faith: a Release of Insanity That no Rubber Room Can Contain

[Popsicle52]

Faith - Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

The only reason people believe in God is faith.

With faith, you can make up anything, and believe in anything, among them: the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Flying Pink Unicorn, and the Orbiting Celestial Teapot. All of which could be possible, but are pretty stupid, illogical and unfounded.

Let me put that in an even more critical light: people in insane asylums often have nothing more to support their beliefs than faith. One that believes he is superman will have enough faith to believe in it.

Sam Harris, from Beyond Belief 2006, describes this more powerfully than I can:

The problem is that religion, because it has been sheltered from criticism in the way it has been, allows people, perfectly sane...perfectly intelligent people, to believe en masse what only idiots or lunatics could believe in isolation.

If you wake up tomorrow morning convinced that saying a few latin words over your breakfast cereal is literally going to turn it into the body of Julius Caesar or Elvis...you have lost your mind.

But if you believe that a cracker becomes the body of jesus at the mass, you're very likely perfectly sane, you just happen to be catholic.

But these beliefs really are equivalent, and they are equivalently crazy

If you don't hold things up to a scientific and logical standard and just believe in things by making them up, which is the equivalent of faith, then you open the door to every possible insane belief. The only thing that seperates the insane beliefs from the sane ones based on faith is that people are insane together en masse and thus are a force that no rubber room can contain.

Follow-up Portion: (just a little extra to clarify the main point)

Faith is basically saying that in cases where the all the evidence points one direction and there is no evidence in another direction, you are able to find it of sound mind to believe that the direction where no evidence is pointing and all evidence is pointing away from is the best choice.

All I'm advocating is making the best choices and faith-based decisions are not the best choice.

This is like making a bet on how many times a coin will land on tails and how many times a coin will land on heads if you flip it 100 times. The best choice is to bet on it landing 50 times heads and 50 times tails. The faith based choice would be to chose 100 times heads and 0 times tails because all the evidence points torwards 50:50 but none of it points towards 100:0.

Thus, by gambling on 100:0 you are gambling on a position that is believed without any evidence and so by definition is faith-based, even if it intuitively just feels right.

The faith based decision could be right, but only once every 100^2 times, or once every ten-thousand times. Any professional gambler in Vegas would tell you that the faith-based guy is about to lose a lot of money.

[nnjj112255kkllo9]

I love it when people try to argue logically from faith. They dont understand that arguing is really mathematics when broken down into its logical components. Often with "god" logic, you get something along the lines of 1+1=78. The funny part of their "logical system" is that you just must accept this w/ no justification.

[LatissimusDorsi]

The title of this thread is very true.

Exhibit A:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eR4WOVY2haw

[Meshugener87]

Well said. It really bothers me that people kill over faith, when the faith is so clearly absurd.

[solidus2k3]

i believe that Santa Claus is real, i have faith in him, so leave me alone! you can't disprove him so there for he exists! i win you lose!

[JohnQQQ]

the best part is the "proof" and "evidence" religions have, which needs faith in order to be labeled as such

[Quintis Vindex]

The problem is that religion, because it has been sheltered from criticism in the way it has been, allows people, perfectly sane...perfectly intelligent people, to believe en masse what only idiots or lunatics could believe in isolation.

If you wake up tomorrow morning convinced that saying a few latin words over your breakfast cereal is literally going to turn it into the body of Julius Caesar or Elvis...you have lost your mind.

But if you believe that a cracker becomes the body of jesus at the mass, you're very likely perfectly sane, you just happen to be catholic.

But these beliefs really are equivalent, and they are equivalently crazy

I like that. Will use it in the future, I've made that same point very similarly myself quite often, but have never used the 'Eucharist' to make it. Religion is insanity with protection in numbers.

[nrellas]

Let's say I decided to write a book, with some stuff in it (cool stuff albeit), burried it for 2000 years, then some people found it and decided that it was true, deciding to follow it word for word. They call it, religion.


Sound remotely familiar?

[Horseradish]

Negs to the first person to bring up Pascal's wager as a counter-argument.

[LatissimusDorsi]

Well, what if u are wrong? I'd rather take the chance than end up in hell

[Horseradish]

Originally Posted by LatissimusDorsi

Well, what if u are wrong? I'd rather take the chance than end up in hell

Negs upon you!!! (j/k)

[skinnycalves]

i am split down the middle when it comes to faith, half of me completely agrees with the OP, the other says there is a God that will equalize all our deeds and misdeeds

no i dont have split personalities

[Meshugener87]

Originally Posted by skinnycalves

i am split down the middle when it comes to faith, half of me completely agrees with the OP, the other says there is a God that will equalize all our deeds and misdeeds

no i dont have split personalities

care to explain why you believe the second part? (no flame, actual curiosity)

[skinnycalves]

im just confused right now thats all

[Popsicle52]

Originally Posted by skinnycalves

im just confused right now thats all

no homo?

[Guardian]

The problem is humans live and understand such a small portion of everything. We can sit here all day and use logic. But unfortunatly its exactly that, human logic. There may come a day where everything we know is thrown out the window and 1+1 somehow does equal 3. Its naive to put full faith into thiesm but also naive to put full faith into athiesm especially with the ops logic.

[samian]

Originally Posted by Guardian

The problem is humans live and understand such a small portion of everything. We can sit here all day and use logic. But unfortunatly its exactly that, human logic. There may come a day where everything we know is thrown out the window and 1+1 somehow does equal 3. Its naive to put full faith into thiesm but also naive to put full faith into athiesm especially with the ops logic.

atheism isn't a faith, because there is no unsupported belief involved.

[B_Master_Flash]

Originally Posted by Guardian

Its naive to put full faith into thiesm but also naive to put full faith into athiesm especially with the ops logic.

Which is probably why no one has yet recommened doing so. The OP is anti-faith, not pro-atheism.

[DaCougarMech]

some people just cannot accept the fact that they're gonna die and just cease to exist
like how people cant accept it when they're told that they're sick and will die in a day
strong denial

[Guardian]

Originally Posted by samian

atheism isn't a faith, because there is no unsupported belief involved.

It is to me

Lets go past the whole allah jesus thing. Athiests do not believe in a higher power, whether its a glob of energy that started the universe or some guy in a robe. Now while it may take "less faith" to be an athiest, we also are not at the point in time nor will we prolly ever be at the point where we know everything. Until we know that we know everything, you cannot be a full athiest without at least some degree of faith.

[DaCougarMech]

Originally Posted by Guardian

It is to me

Lets go past the whole allah jesus thing. Athiests do not believe in a higher power, whether its a glob of energy that started the universe or some guy in a robe. Now while it may take "less faith" to be an athiest, we also are not at the point in time nor will we prolly ever be at the point where we know everything. Until we know that we know everything, you cannot be a full athiest without at least some degree of faith.

OH OKAY!!!!
so you're saying that my belief in the laws of gravity is comparable to a christian's belief in an invisible sky daddy
our faith is that our beliefs have a scientific basis behind it. christian faith is in beliefs that cannot be proven

[Wannabefit08]

Do some idiots not realise that this is the same thread that's been posted a million times already?

[Meshugener87]

Originally Posted by Guardian

It is to me

Lets go past the whole allah jesus thing. Athiests do not believe in a higher power, whether its a glob of energy that started the universe or some guy in a robe. Now while it may take "less faith" to be an athiest, we also are not at the point in time nor will we prolly ever be at the point where we know everything. Until we know that we know everything, you cannot be a full athiest without at least some degree of faith.

we dont NOT believe in a higher power, though. We're open to anything, as long as there is hard proof and reason.

[Guardian]

Originally Posted by Meshugener87

we dont NOT believe in a higher power, though. We're open to anything, as long as there is hard proof and reason.

Then your an agnostic

A true athiest firmly believes there is no god or higher power. If your open to anything then your agnostic, so which is it?

[samian]

Originally Posted by Guardian

It is to me

Lets go past the whole allah jesus thing. Athiests do not believe in a higher power, whether its a glob of energy that started the universe or some guy in a robe. Now while it may take "less faith" to be an athiest, we also are not at the point in time nor will we prolly ever be at the point where we know everything. Until we know that we know everything, you cannot be a full athiest without at least some degree of faith.

Ok, I do agree totally with this. Given a sufficiently elusive god, every ration atheist must turn into an agnostic.

However, in my opinion, the Christian God isn't sufficiently elusive, as He appears in the bible. Claims of Genesis, for example, are very extreme (and can be refuted rationally), but once you chose to take one part of the Bible as metaphor you undermine the rest which you call real. By a selective interpretation, you add your own information to the bible, and it becomes less a historic account of Jesus and God, and more your own account.

If you define a "whether its a glob of energy that started the universe or some guy in a robe" as the general idea of God, then of course I can't claim to be an (i) rational (ii) atheist. But this is not the claim.

[samian]

This is getting onto semantics. Whether I am athist or not isn't so much the issue, as whether the Christian God is consistent with science. And in my opinion the answer is no.

[Guardian]

Originally Posted by DaCougarMech

OH OKAY!!!!
so you're saying that my belief in the laws of gravity is comparable to a christian's belief in an invisible sky daddy
our faith is that our beliefs have a scientific basis behind it. christian faith is in beliefs that cannot be proven

In a sense it is, though not a strong comparison they do share on thing, human origins. Your belief in the "law" of gravity is merely years of human observation of our surroundings, that doesnt mean one day that "law" cant change. Did you create gravity? Are you absolutly positive that its properties will never change?


If you are as logic with science as you are with religion you would realize science, though much more reasonable and probable then religion, is not 100% for sure either.

[DaCougarMech]

Originally Posted by Guardian

In a sense it is, though not a strong comparison they do share on thing, human origins. Your belief in the "law" of gravity is merely years of human observation of our surroundings, that doesnt mean one day that "law" cant change. Did you create gravity? Are you absolutly positive that its properties will never change?


If you are as logic with science as you are with religion you would realize science, though much more reasonable and probable then religion, is not 100% for sure either.

that is very true but you're asking me to compare a drop of water to an ocean

[Guardian]

Originally Posted by DaCougarMech

that is very true but you're asking me to compare a drop of water to an ocean

My agenda and has been for some time is that athiests need to stop pushing the science card when science itself requires a certain level of faith. New age minds should focus on agnostic thought based on human lack of complete knowledge.


But its easier for athiests and people along there line of thinking to go hating on religion and ranting rather then admit the simple fact "i dont know"

[DaCougarMech]

well, we believe religion to be completely made up and false
and you're really splitting hairs when you ask us to admit in an infinitely small chance of a an invisible deity that somehow exists but leaves absolutely no proof of its existence. it's complete speculation based on little or no evidence and really is only as comparable of a faith as santa or the easter bunny.