XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 13-January-2015 8:27 AM, grabber wrote:   
   > On 12/01/2015 08:13, felix_unger wrote:   
   >> On 11-January-2015 9:19 PM, grabber wrote:   
   >>> On 11/01/2015 04:24, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>> On 06-January-2015 10:20 PM, Malte Runz wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> "felix_unger"  skrev i meddelelsen   
   >>>>> news:cgeitjFjt09U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 30-December-2014 1:27 PM, Malte Runz wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> > "felix_unger"  skrev i meddelelsen >   
   >>>>>> news:cgdpvbFdtgnU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > (snip)   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> >> ... atheists cannot prove God does not exist, you can only   
   >>>>>> believe   
   >>>>>> it >> to be the case, and so you have faith that belief is correct.   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > And so do you, have faith, when you believe in the   
   >>>>>> non-existence of   
   >>>>>> > invisible pink unicorns in a parallel universe, right?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I have faith (confidence) in a belief that such a proposition is   
   >>>>>> nonsense is true   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And I have confidence that there are no gods. Now, would you say that   
   >>>>> a theist also has "confidence" in the existence of a particular god?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> of course. religious belief is based on faith not proof.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Or is his faith different from the 'faith=confidence'?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> no.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > I don't believe we're all brains soaking in pods in a matrix,   
   >>>>>> either, > even if I can't prove it, and it doesn't take faith to not   
   >>>>>> believe it. I > live my life, as if we aren't 'soakers' and as if   
   >>>>>> there are no gods. All > three possibilites are equally absurd, and   
   >>>>>> to make it a question about > faith shows a lack of understanding.   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > But... why can't you and so many of the, openly, theistic   
   >>>>>> minded, >   
   >>>>>> understand that it does not take faith to not believe in   
   >>>>>> something, >   
   >>>>>> which takes faith to have belief in the existence of?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> it doesn't take faith to not believe, ...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So lack of belief in gods doesn't take faith. Great.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> ... but it takes faith to believe that a belief is correct/true.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You believe that it is true that there are no pink invisible   
   >>>>> unicorns.   
   >>>>> Is your belief utterly faithbased or are you letting a little sliver   
   >>>>> of rational thinking creep in and help you form an opinion?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> it's both faith and reason, but in this case 99.9% reason   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> ... ie.. one has faith that ones belief is correct. Is it not so?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I believe that a tiger will not appear out of the blue in my bathroom   
   >>>>> when I go to brush my teeth. It is not a question of faith.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> it's a belief that you have, if you happen to think that. it's also   
   >>>> something that you happen to believe is true. to say you have faith   
   >>>> that   
   >>>> your belief is correct is just another way of saying that. but in this   
   >>>> instance the amount of 'faith' in your belief is miniscule since you   
   >>>> already know that it can't happen. so we could say that for all   
   >>>> intents   
   >>>> and purpose, there is really no faith involved. however, if your   
   >>>> bathroom were in a thatched bungalow in the African jungle, where   
   >>>> tigers   
   >>>> are know to roam, that had only open unglazed windows, you would   
   >>>> need to   
   >>>> have a great deal more faith that any such belief was correct. this is   
   >>>> the problem with you atheists. you see everything in black and white,   
   >>>> and fail to consider each case or situation on it's merits. it's also   
   >>>> the reason that I keep saying you lack common sense.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> I believe that the airplane, I'm sitting in, will take off and fly me   
   >>>>> to my destination. No faith needed there, either.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> if you have such a belief I would say it's completely unjustified.   
   >>>> planes crash during takeoff or flight, or when landing. you certainly   
   >>>> need faith to believe it won't happen! you could argue that the amount   
   >>>> of faith you need is small, due the the likelihood of the plane coming   
   >>>> to grief in some manner being very small based on airline crash   
   >>>> statistics, but you cannot know that your plane will not crash, so you   
   >>>> have to have faith that your belief that it won't crash is correct.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   Call it 'faith=confidence' if you like, but don't equate it with   
   >>>>> the   
   >>>>> faith of the theist that there is a god.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I don't understand what you mean. faith is faith.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>> What you have discovered here is that "evidence" isn't the only word   
   >>> that you want to use differently than do at least some other people   
   >>> here. "Belief" and "faith" turn out to be also in that category, at   
   >>> least while you're talking to Malte.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's clear that Malte is happy to say he "believes" things that he   
   >>> knows are probable rather than certain: it seems you are not.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's also clear that Malte is capable of distinguishing between   
   >>> "faith" meaning a high degree of confidence in a belief, and "faith"   
   >>> referring to a belief held in the absence of sufficient evidence. It   
   >>> seems you are either unable or unwilling to make this discussion.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's not surprising that you find you can't agree with people if you   
   >>> don't establish shared understandings of the words you want to use.   
   >>   
   >> all beliefs require a degree of faith in their veracity.   
   >   
   > That depends on what one means by "belief", and even more on what one   
   > means by "faith". Weren't you attending?   
      
   I know you think you're being clever, but you're not.   
      
   >   
   >> not my fault if   
   >> he doesn't understand that   
   >   
   > I know you'd prefer dismiss people for using words differently than   
   > you want to, rather than actually engage with their message - nothing   
   > new there. You never seem to get beyond disputing definitions.   
      
   I know you think you're being clever, but you're not.   
      
   >   
   >>>   
   >>> (As an aside, I note that you think tigers roam wild in Africa. You   
   >>> might want to check this out).   
   >>   
   >> It was just a hypothetical example to illustrate a point. I prefixed it   
   >> with 'if'   
   >   
   > Sheesh - why do some people find it so hard to say "Oops, I got that   
   > wrong"?   
   >   
      
   because I NEVER said tigers roam wild in Africa. why do some people find   
   it so hard to say "Oops, I got that wrong"?   
      
   --   
   rgds,   
      
   Pete   
   -------   
      
   "JE SUIS CHARLIE"   
      
   http://thereligionofpeace.com   
   http://pamelageller.com/   
   http://www.barenakedislam.com/   
   Brigitte Gabriel's answer to 'peaceful' moslems.. http://tinyurl   
   com/brigitteGab   
   "The right to free speech includes the right to offend"   
   "ISIS's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith"   
   -Barack Obama, idiotic President of the USA   
   "These terrorists and fanatics have nothing to do with the Muslim religion"   
   - idiotic FRENCH PRESIDENT FRANCOIS HOLLANDE   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)