Faith requires god to “let there be light”. The flashlight however was invented around 1899 by a man named David Misell, an inventor - no information on whether or not he was inspired to do so by faith.
Metaphore play time over.
Even the most ardent believer must surely admit that it’s reason and logic that drags man forward into the “unknown”. You cannot possibly believe that relying on 2000 to 4000 year old collection of notes on parchment is in any way forward looking. It is anything but that.
To wit, sciences publish new information all the time – they are forward gazing and exloratory by definition. Religion and faith based phylosophies re-warm the same old hash, over and over, never saying anything new or revealing. They are backwards looking and intellectually dead (as Der Trihs succinctly noted elsewhere).
The invention if the flashlight does not disprove faith as a process that helps humanity. I don’t know the story of this invention, though I do know when we seem stuck in a problem we know to take a break from it, leave it, either sleep, take a walk, etc, get away from it - AND that will help. That is faith, there is no logical explanation as to why it does, till we do it several times and see that there is a pattern that it works, then we look in to it - make a logical explanation for it, but hey the man of faith was on to something - that is the man of faith leading and the man of logic verifying that faith works to something we accept today
I don’t know why you are bringing up religion, perhaps personal vendetta, but faith does not require religion, just emotion.
Taking a break from a difficult problem by taking a step back and doing something different, or even nothing at all is = “faith”? :dubious:
I see neither logic nor verification for this claim you just made. I see a great big assumption leading to a conclusion you want to be true, but I do not see any kind of logic or reason for either.
THIS is your response to my post which I have quoted below?
Notice I said that “as” a man affirms, he will come to believe. Disagree with that?
Also the connection between affirmation -> faith is not a straight equality but an established psychological path. Do me the favor of including my quote when you reply to any of my posts. It will improve your ability to arrive at my premise.
Hmmmm. That would depend entirely on the dedication and perseverance of the individual. Sufficient quantitative change inevitably results in qualitative change. IMO.
The individual may come to find that, through dedication and perseverance, belief is not the right course of action. Sufficient quantitative change may result in qualitative change, but who is to say with certainty what that change will be?
Belief is the fabric of human thought. Those who have not knowledge have only belief/opinion in their minds. God is beyond belief but is not beyond experience.
The end is certain, the is time up to the will of the individual. IMHO.
I believe I quoted your post (#82) in its entirety.
It’s not my job to try to guess that “->” does not mean “=”. If there is a missing constant implied or some missing magic required to go from one state to the other, the onus is on you to state it clearly.
And no, I don’t disagree with what you posted. What I said was - if you start with the wrong assumption you’ll most likely arrive at the wrong conclusion. Both are an established psychological paths. Though I have no idea what you mean by that statment either.
Well, what about people who affirm…falsely? Like, a use car salesman who affirms, loud as anything, that this little baby here runs like a top…but he knows full well that it actually runs like a hobbled camel, he’s just lying has ass off to make a sale.
It is a most emphatic affirmation…but he isn’t likely to come to believe it.
