XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:04:42 +0000, grabber  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 14/01/2015 01:39, felix_unger wrote:   
   >> On 14-January-2015 9:58 AM, grabber wrote:   
   >>> On 13/01/2015 00:06, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>> 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,   
   >>>   
   >>> No, I don't think it takes any particular cleverness to establish   
   >>> shared understandings of the words you're using in a discussion;   
   >>> what's in question is why you would want to go out of your way to   
   >>> resist gaining any such understanding.   
   >>>   
   >>> So when Malte says: "Call it 'faith=confidence' if you like, but don't   
   >>> equate it with the faith of the theist that there is a god", he is   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)