DrmDoc

What is faith?

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I think the breakdown in discussions between the religious and those who are not is that so often one side doesn't really listen to the other. I don't think Eric was trying to tell you why you should use faith, but was instead telling you what faith means to him and how he uses it. As with most things there are many ways to approach a problem. 

With parachuting Eric uses his religious techniques, you use risk analysis, while others use financial, image or adrenaline considerations. In short, each of us uses what is important and useful to us as individuals. Not everyone relies strictly on logic and science.

Then again some of us pack our own chutes... 

Edited by Moontanman
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Then again some of us pack out own chutes... 

and tomorrow will tell...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, zapatos said:

I may have just missed it but I didn't notice that claim by Eric H. I just saw him say he has faith, and things have worked out.

He said faith helps him take risks that might end in him getting hurt. I don't think it's a big leap to interpret that as faith that his god will protect him, or make things work out well, however mysterious it may seem.

21 hours ago, zapatos said:

What he said was that he initiated the interaction by praying to god for help. He didn't say God tells him to do things outside his comfort zone.

Don't mean to be difficult but it feels like you are putting words in Eric's mouth to bolster your position.

He said he prays for help to do things outside his comfort zone he wouldn't normally be capable of. People do this without prayer, without the religious perspective, all the time. I was asking him if he thought it was his god urging him to do these things. It could be that he wanted to do this on his own and uses prayer to give him courage. It could also be that he felt "moved" to take these out-of-character risks by whatever means his god uses to encourage him. It could be something else. I felt it was important to ask.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

He said faith helps him take risks that might end in him getting hurt.

 

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I don't think it's a big leap to interpret that as faith that his god will protect him, or make things work out well, however mysterious it may seem.

 

That's an interesting interpretation.

Edited by zapatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Intrigued said:

I suspected as much, but I'm not clear what point you were trying to make. I think most would agree that perspective can and often does influence the questions we ask as well as the answers we give. Many would say, and I would agree, that this is normal and understood and not necessarily negative. All well and good, but how are you tying this into the role, or character  of faith?

 

Because I think it indicates there are basically two ways to approach the problem. 

One is from the perspective of environment, and the other as identity. 

Environmental perspective would be

some thing adds value, subtracts value, or has neutral effect.

It does not respond. It can only reject based on those values. Support or rejection isn't from the 'area' of environment, its from the content of environment. Weather or not a condition can find support there for its values. Based on those it has, and their ability to recognise another.

A person who who does not 'identify' with that condition as 'Human' or part of a common Human direction (in evolutionary terms) is more likely to see it from that  perspective. The person who sees their identity as some thing other, or independent of that condition. The person who puts faith in their own conditions of being or identity as the 'correct' manifestation of Humanity. The condition that  'shields' their Humanity from these 'other' conditions or  harm. If their own conditions of being were universal to the Human environment, the threat of those 'other',  harmful conditions would not exist. Then they could recognise  a common identity as theirs.

So to varied extents, faith imposes its own conditions on its environment. As 'Right' for Humanity or Identity. And reduces its environmental diversity to do so.

The second approach would be to recognise a set of Human conditions are not what they could be, or not contributing effectively to the human condition and to find out why, and how  that can be corrected or improved at its source. What are those 'conditions' acting on? 

Because everything is reduced to identity or environment. Identity is what is accepted as part of self. What that self  takes response -ability for, or respond to, to uphold its  self condition.

From your point, or perspective, as a single human organism, your dimensions and conditions are decided, by your genetic make up or internal direction with external factors being affective to that condition.

But your genetics have for the most part limited your own condition or point and its evolution is finished. 

I think cultures do the same for humanity, and we need to be careful in how we allow a Human identity to define itself. Recognition of its parts does not mean acceptance of their conditions. Just recognition of them as something to work with instead of against, to establish mutual values that don't detract from either. That contribute to the available space of both through their interaction. like our own cells do for their body content and condition.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, naitche said:

Support or rejection isn't from the 'area' of environment,

More precisely, it’s from a reconstruction of the environment, after the fact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Intrigued said:

 If I think I might like to make a parachute jump I carry out what in current buzz words is called a risk assessment. This might include a look at the accident statistics for jumps, discussion with experienced and novice jumpers, reviews of the group or company I shall make the jump with, objective examination of the physical skill set and mental attitude I would bring to the jump, relevance of weather conditions and landing terrain, etc. On completion of that analysis I would have a realistic, semi-quantitative measure of the risk involved in a jump.

What you have described is just an exercise in critical thinking, there are no risks in critical thinking; that is until you put your plan into action.

Quote

Faith would have no relevance.

Change the word faith to trust. You know that when you jump out the plane, your life will depend on the parachute, you have to fully trust that everything will work this time. When you jump; the success rate of previous jumps become irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, iNow said:

More precisely, it’s from a reconstruction of the environment, after the fact

Yes, thank you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 1:51 PM, naitche said:

 

Because I think it indicates there are basically two ways to approach the problem. 

 

 

I should have have included  the 3rd approach, Of viewing every thing as either self ( identity, ) or environment ( the conditions we have )

:rolleyes:

Comments made by Eric H and others including myself seem to indicate that reduction is not always a result of faith. But the idea of blocking or shielding seems to hold.

If conditions are subjective limitations, over come through recognition and response, I'm going to say purpose gives direction (or dimension) .

Direction and purpose are  inherent to  biological identity for  its integrity. Much of its condition is also inherent, which affects Response. So maybe accepting or taking in  conditions  beyond the self , Conditions Response.

Redirects  response and purpose to upholding integrity of the secondary identity, and the conditions its founded on.

The most beneficial manifestation of 'Faith' in the Religious sense,  could be to block that secondary conditioned response. Keep it  open to diverse direction, and ability of response.

Still gives  me some concept of what a multiverse might be.:blink:

Needless to say, mathematics are not my strength and might explain  why I have so much trouble untangling and expressing the values I need @Strange

Edited by naitche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, naitche said:

Needless to say, mathematics are not my strength

Neither is communicating clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 4:51 AM, naitche said:

Because I think it indicates there are basically two ways to approach the problem.

What problem?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

I should have have included  the 3rd approach, Of viewing every thing as either self ( identity, ) or environment ( the conditions we have )

:rolleyes:

Comments made by Eric H and others including myself seem to indicate that reduction is not always a result of faith. But the idea of blocking or shielding seems to hold.

If conditions are subjective limitations, over come through recognition and response, I'm going to say purpose gives direction (or dimension) .

Direction and purpose are  inherent to  biological identity for  its integrity. Much of its condition is also inherent, which affects Response. So maybe accepting or taking in  conditions  beyond the self , Conditions Response.

Redirects  response and purpose to upholding integrity of the secondary identity, and the conditions its founded on.

The most beneficial manifestation of 'Faith' in the Religious sense,  could be to block that secondary conditioned response. Keep it  open to diverse direction, and ability of response.

Still gives  me some concept of what a multiverse might be.:blink:

Needless to say, mathematics are not my strength and might explain  why I have so much trouble untangling and expressing the values I need @Strange

If you're trying to make sense, please try harder. 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, naitche said:

Comments made by Eric H and others including myself seem to indicate that reduction is not always a result of faith.

Reduction of what?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

But the idea of blocking or shielding seems to hold.

Blocking or shielding what? From what?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

If conditions are subjective limitations, over come through recognition and response, I'm going to say purpose gives direction (or dimension) .

What conditions? Why would they be subjective limitations? You mean "overcome" not "over come". How does "recognition and response" overcome the conditions? What "response" are you suggesting? What do you mean by "direction"? How on earth can you use "dimension" as a synonym for "direction"?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

Direction and purpose are  inherent to  biological identity for  its integrity.

Are they? What evidence do you have for that? What do you mean by "biological identity"? What do you mean by "integrity"? How do "direction and purpose" relate to "integrity"?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

Much of its condition is also inherent, which affects Response.

What is "it"? In other words, "much of what's condition"? And how does it affect response? ("Response should not have a capital R).

1 hour ago, naitche said:

So maybe accepting or taking in  conditions  beyond the self , Conditions Response.

This is very unclear. Is "conditions" acting as a verb here? It and "response" should not have capital letters; it makes them look ;ike proper nouns and makes the sentence unparsable.

1 hour ago, naitche said:

The most beneficial manifestation of 'Faith' in the Religious sense,  could be to block that secondary conditioned response.

What "secondary conditioned response"? (Neither "faith" nor "religious" should have capital letters.)

What evidence do you have that that "faith blocks secondary conditioned response"?

1 hour ago, naitche said:

Still gives  me some concept of what a multiverse might be.

What on Earth has any of this got to do with the multiverse. That is just crazy.

 

In short, most of your sentences make no sense. Those that might have some meaning appear to be just unsupported assertions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 4:51 AM, naitche said:

Because I think it indicates there are basically two ways to approach the problem.

People have faith because they believe in something unproven, not a problem; until the politicians see a way to exploit it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now