Other Possibilities

Cleric_of_Reason · 03-06-2008, 12:23 AM

I was just thinking about the whole Faith vs. Reason debate and the fact that it has been one of the biggest dualities stretching across the ages almost as long as Good vs. Evil has been around. But what if we're missing something? What if there was a third element to go against Faith vs. Reason? Faith vs. Reason vs. ______What would it be called? If we truly want to find answers maybe we should look a little beyond the fight that's been raging for years. Maybe if we step to the side a little we'll find a glimpse of something that we didn't even realize existed. Or maybe I'm just crazy and trying to make things too complicated.

But there's always more than one way to get and answer.
2+2=4
2x2=4
8/2=4
etc.

This is just something I've been mulling over a little bit.

Jasen777 · 03-06-2008, 02:44 AM

Experience is another force. You can reason all you want, but if it doesn't match your experience of reality, who cares?

Cleric_of_Reason · 03-07-2008, 01:03 AM

I didn't even think of that and ironically it's a big part of the reason I started questioning my faith. I guess I couldn't put it into words. Thanks!

Jasen777 · 03-08-2008, 12:54 AM

It was the major factor leading to me leaving my faith. OTOH, it's a major reason why many people stay in their faith.

Og · 03-08-2008, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleric_of_Reason

But there's always more than one way to get and answer.
2+2=4
2x2=4
8/2=4
etc.

This is just something I've been mulling over a little bit.

Those are all mathematically equivalent statements. Faith and reason are not equivalent in any sense of the term nor do they get you to the same answer.

Jasen777 · 03-08-2008, 10:18 AM

It depends on how you define the terms, and many here seem to have only a completely negative view of faith - as biased against it as some religionists are for it.

Og · 03-08-2008, 03:06 PM

I have faith that observation, collaboration, experimentation, and non-dogmatic exploration will move us towards the truth.

My faith is based on how successful it has been in the past in my personal experience, not due to some nebulous promises about the future or outlandish and unsubstantiated claims of the distant past before we even knew about things like the germ theory of disease or that schizophrenia was a chemical disorder (i.e. religious faith).

romansh · 03-08-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Og

I have faith that observation, collaboration, experimentation, and non-dogmatic exploration will move us towards the truth.

Hi Og ....just a question on the use of the word "faith" ... the above statement of faith is based on a fair amount of evidence; which has started to accumulate since the Renaissance. When we use use faith in a religious sense there is little or no reproducible evidence (in my observation/opinion) for the said faith.

So my question is it truly faith that you are experiencing?

Cleric_of_Reason · 03-09-2008, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Og

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleric_of_Reason

But there's always more than one way to get and answer.
2+2=4
2x2=4
8/2=4
etc.

This is just something I've been mulling over a little bit.

Those are all mathematically equivalent statements. Faith and reason are not equivalent in any sense of the term nor do they get you to the same answer.

My apologies about my vagueness on the mathematical equations. I was referring to how we got here and I failed to show that. Basically the Theories of Creation and Evolution are the main contenders, but what I was getting at is maybe there's another possibility.

Og · 03-10-2008, 06:49 AM

The theory of creation is only a "contender" because it was there when modern science showed up. It's not a "side of the argument"...

Nor is science a "side of the argument." There is only evidence. There is no third (or even second) side to come from. There is only that which the evidence points towards.