In all seriousness, my family was out of town for The Paint Horse Association's National Championship horse show every year on my birthday, so now it is an annual source of depression when it rolls around. When people give me stuff on it I wonder why we don't just give people stuff for any or no reason, at any time. I feel ashamed. I feel they succumbed to the societal pressure called 'tradition' and gifts only make me feel worse. I usually don't tell anyone when it is.
I dont expect any presents..and its not important at all.. it is always like a normal day.. I dont even want everbody's birthday wishes, so, I usually deactivate my facebook account the whole birthday month.. so no one will remember... of course, some friends do remember but at least they could not post anything on my wall .. 😁
I would rather be left alone. Tend to agree that it's just another day. When I was younger, I wanted stuff for my birthday. As I got older, I just don't care anymore. I don't want anything. Of course, the downside is I forget other people's birthdays because I don't find mine to be important at all.
It would be okay to go to lunch or dinner with a few people close to me, though. That's low-key. I'm not that special really. :P
I'm way too panick-attacky for birthday dinners. So much pressure. Such a waste of good intentions on a being that is appreciative of the gesture while unable to enjoy it. Any other night of the year I can enjoy dinner with friends, but it's the whole birthday depression garbage that makes the birthday dinner prospect torturous.
Other people's birthday dinners can be fun, depending on the alignment of the stars of course.
The only thing that usually happens on my birthday (or hers) is my Mom and I go out to lunch or something usually. I have a cousin who's birthday is one day before mine and we used to get some of the family together and go out to lunch somewhere. All of that is fine to me because there is never much focus on the "birthday" part of it. No singing or candles or anything. Maybe a couple cards, but all in all, it's just a nice lunch with people I know.
I kind of view my birthday the same as any other holiday. I hate christmas for example. I hate it for many reasons, but for me, it's just a day I get to see my family. Nothing else. It's all in how I choose to see those days. When I was like 16, we went out for lunch somewhere and they had the servers and stuff come over to the table doing their clapping and loud singing "Happy Birthday" and I was SO pissed! I told her not to EVER do that to me again! I hated it so much and I don't think I ever liked birthdays much after that. Now that I'm 39, I really don't like them. It's not that I have anxiety about getting older because I don't really FEEL all that different than I did 15-20 years ago (aside from being much wiser), but I do hate being the center of attention and being "celebrated" for something I see no meaning in.
I think I might find my wedding anniversary special (I've never had one of those yet!) or anything involving a wife, but other than that, I don't think so.
Just thinking about why I hate christmas so much. You know, it's not in the bible ANYWHERE? It's completely made up and has no biblical basis whatsoever.. literally NONE. Totally made up, yet the God of the Bible explicitly says NOT to worship him in any old way they want, but only in the ways HE specifies. His feasts and festivals, but nothing else. Very specific instructions, yet christians just decide they know better and do whatever they want anyway in total defiance to their God. Hilarious, right? Really ticked me off while I was "trying" to believe all that stuff. They don't even know what their book says or they only care about the parts they like.
Then, there's Santa.. why do christians like Santa Claus? It's just "Satan Claws" with the letters rearranged and slightly changed. They must all want Satan's Claws digging into their children, right?
The lights are pretty, but the rest is garbage and just tells the whole world that they don't really believe the stuff themselves. They would be more obedient to their God's commands instead of adhering to their traditions instead. Funny, that's exactly what the Pharisees did. Jesus hated them. Called them a "brood of vipers" which would have been a pretty serious insult back then.
Meh, they just make it up as they go along. Anyway, sorry I went off topic a (lot) little.
I can relate to that Gohan... so , I have to say something😆... I used to be very committed in my custom about Christmas.. like I heard night mass every 24th of December every year... ALONE...(because I cannot dragged my ex bf to attend the mass because he enjoyed more on his friends).. so, I usually went alone every year,and I noticed that all the church-goers are mostly with their families, with their childrens and grand childrens, boyfriends and girlfriends, couples.. and I was just alone... (it made me envy to them most of the time) I wished nothing but to have "someone" I can bring on that special day..but it never happened.. I became single for many years and yet I continue to hear mass during christmas days..- same scenario, same people and same me being alone again... I got tired..not from attending the mass but from my situation.. .why would I always go alone?.. when will be the right time I can hear mass on christmas eve that I have someone with?...is something I always ask for..
So, just last Christmas eve, I stopped from going to church... what for? If I have to feel the same sentiment.. so, what I did, i slept very early, I didn't even heard my neice calling me when the clock turned to 12... I cannot hear any fireworks too...
Thats the time I realized christmas is not for all.. it is not for all who wants to celebrate christmas because there are lonely souls like me that can never appreciate the season for the moment...its sad because a lot of people are not that happy during holiday season... many suffered from being lonely, from being broken, from being away from their family, saddest and worst is, there are people who lost their love ones on the day of christmas... so its sad... not all people have to celebrate christmas...
So, am not really fond about holidays and on every occasions... its just normal day for me..
I used to go to Xmas mass with my Mom, but I just get so irritated listening to it because I've read the Bible and I think to myself "No! That is NOT what it says!" and I can't talk to anyone because they're all eating it up since it's what they want to hear.
Meh! I guess ignorance really is bliss sometimes. I can't go back now. Just another reason I turned away from religion entirely, but have remained deeply spiritual in some ways. Maybe even more so without religion.
If I had a special someone, I'd just want to stay home with her which is somewhere I'd actually want to be. It's way more fun.
Hey Mike, this (below) is my Dec 4th post - thought you might find it interesting:
Title: Notta Big Fan
When one's family is nothing but tragedy, the holidays are nothing but a source of the sort of pain that makes it no wonder 'tis the season with the highest suicide rate. I'm also against dishonesty and find it odd we teach children to have faith in a Santa lie on this particular day, without too much thought to larger adult parallels of playing make-believe with faith in our lies. The idea of mating our retail economy's yearly savior with the birth of Christ is appalling, and I'm not even sort of a Christian (but I do use reason well, and I know right from wrong). I'm looking forward to surviving this dark hypocritical season and spanning time in 2019. To all you lovers of Christmas, well, enjoy what you have and have a Merry Christmas.
Yeah, it's weird. Why make children focus on something that can actually proven to be false? There is no Santa and there's no one living at the north pole. There really isn't any subjective wiggle room there like there is with matters dealing with potentially existing realms or beings currently beyond our perception. Santa? Why would they encourage kids to believe in Santa and not focus more on Christ? Not only more, but entirely?
There's so much about religion that makes no sense to me. The Santa thing is one. Isn't he the definition of a false god? Encouraging kids to believe something that you, as a parent, KNOW is FALSE? Why would you encourage your kids to believe things that are objectively lies? Why? Doesn't God tell them not to lie? They do it to their kids.
I also agree that it's all about making money, these holidays. That's why you start seeing Christmas stuff being sold in stores in F'in November right after Halloween. It's all about money. Everything is. They should be outraged by having their savior and his followers exploited so corporations can make millions, but they're not. It's so funny. They make up a holiday that has nothing to do with Christ or God and then allow it to be used for exploitation. That's love for ya!
Also, Christ wasn't a Christian and that's not even his real name. The greeks gave him the name Jesus only it was Iesus since the letter "J" didn't even exist at the time. "Yahushua" was a loyal Jew, so why would he create a religion for people to follow that he didn't even belong to? So many things and so little sense.
Anyway, while holidays can remind people of what they have, it can also remind people of what they don't have as Gab eluded to. Like most things, I guess it's a matter of perspective. I don't happen to like religious holidays because of all the hypocrisy. Hell, Easter isn't in the Bible either. The two most prominent "christian" holidays aren't christian at all. I was interested in knowing the Hebrew "God" enough to read the book and find out the truth of what it says, so why don't most christians seem to do that? Meh! It's all built on lies, all this stuff. Christians invent lies and believe them which, to me, is a rejection of God in favor of tradition. Christians may just be the modern day Pharisees. God commands one thing and christians say "Wellll we're gonna do this other thing instead. Praise Jesus!"
I really hate christmas. Easter doesn't get on my nerves as much for some reason, but both are pagan in origin.
I go up on my roof and fart into a megaphone with the volume turned all the way up. Actually, I don't even know when the last two happen. lol .. and I don't have a megaphone. :( .. but I would totally do that if I did.
I like hitting golf balls off the roof with my 3 wood (I can't smack a driver for shit).
Easter comes from the "pagan" rites of Estrus (scare quotes on 'pagan' because what could be more pagan than the sacrificial death of God?).
I think there's some bizarre ironic honesty in the Santa lie and the lies they're telling themselves they believe. I personally don't find the Christ lie any better than the Santa lie, but that's just me. I might just be funny like that.
Fat Tuesday is my fave religious holiday - although the Christians think it's followed by Ash Wednesday, I prefer to think of it as followed by 4 Alarm Hangover Wednesday.
I;m smashed; my knee is fucked, and I'm gonna go pass out now.
The only thing I find amusing about Xmas and New Years are .. am being surrounded with FOOD🍝🍛🎂🍤🍩🍖🍕🍗.. I cannot resist it.. it just sooooo fun to eat😁..it totally destroy my diet scheme😁.
I date and pamper myself on Valentine's day since I dont have a bf..
(attending mass, go to massage parlor, eating street food, watching acoustic band while emoting😢😁)..
I do rituals during holy thursday .. there are spots here (in our place where people could penitence) including on good Friday..
All Souls Day is the only day I could visit those departed love ones, so, i make it sure, I wont miss this day..
Well, with Christ, there seems to be almost complete agreement in the historicity of the man referred to as "Jesus" in the scriptures. This man certainly did exist, was baptized by John the Baptist (described by Jesus in the bible as the reincarnation of Elijah the Prophet) and he was crucified by Pontius Pilate. So, at least the man DID exist and walk the earth. Any claims or theories of non-existence have been effectively refuted at this point.
The points of disagreement arise with regards to the details of his life and supernatural events attributed to him. Some other things do seem relatively certain, though. Jesus was a Galilean Jew and lived most of his life in Judea and Galilee, he had followers (disciples), he was involved in some controversy in the temple, he was crucified by the Romans and his disciples continued after his death with some of them being persecuted. Those are not universally believed like the previous two certain things, though.
With Santa, what historical evidence is there for him? None.. at all. At least the man "Jesus" actually walked the earth. Santa and his flying reindeer not so much. It's a complete lie that children are encouraged to believe anyway. Parents even put "Santa" on their presents. Why? I never understood this. Why go so far to deceive a child?
As for Gab. :P
Yes, I pig out on Xmas and Easter dinner, but I prepare for that in the days before by eating even less than usual. I don't have any guilt then. :P New Years there's no feast for me. Just another day.
I don't even pay attention to Valentine's Day really and I don't get into the religious stuff at all. Maybe you'll have a Valentine in 2020, though!
People are free to believe in whatever lies they want - look up Saint Nicholas of Myra (aka Nicholas of Bari, aka Santa MF'n Claus). Equal footing was my claim. The supernatural attributes are the whole thing for Jesus to be Christ - lots of human beings were crucified, persecuted, etc., and you might look into the debunking of nearly all the sources for what we "know" about Jesus the man - I mean, if you're bored or interested or something...
Really all faith is a self deception. It stands juxtaposed against thinking and knowing. Properly employed it makes the faithful a kinder, less suicidal person.
Yes, there are many disagreements about the personal details of his life. The "complete agreement" is among scholars and historians both religious and non-religious.
I see your point about Saint Nicholas. I guess what I'm saying is that is Santa actually did exist, we could find him at the north pole or at least some remnants of what would be a huge house with a factory and little elf corpses. Also, flying reindeer and one with a light bulb for a nose.
With Jesus, what evidence would even be left now if he rose from the dead, walked on water or turned water into wine? It's not like people back then could just whip out their smart phones and start recording video to upload to the internet. Even if he really did all those things, there wouldn't be any evidence now that they ever happened.
On top of that, all but a small minority of people back then were completely illiterate and would not be writing anything down. Of course, it's still highly unlikely and I tend not to believe any of that stuff literally happened.
To me, rising from the dead, walking on water and all these other miraculous claims are abstract allegories used to describe states of psychological being. Not literally true, but metaphorically true. Ascension to a higher state of being or consciousness. Shedding old skin and being reborn into a new you. That's part of what the resurrection is all about to me, but of course, I also believe in reincarnation, so it holds meaning for me there as well. I can't prove it, of course. :) Just one of those unknowable things I happen to think is possible that some part of us lives on after the body dies.
Well, I have faith in all kinds of things as does everyone. I have faith that when I go to the store, the other people there aren't going to kill me. I have faith that other drivers on the road are sober and that traffic lights won't malfunction.
Romantic relationships are all about having "faith" in the other person that they aren't going to lie and cheat on you. Worldviews require faith. We have faith that politicians and governments will do the right thing. What evidence is there to believe that they are true before believing? People continue to believe some of those things even when there is evidence to contradict it. Maybe you're believing lies, maybe you're not. "Faith" and "Trust" aren't really that dissimilar. Things like religion, politics and whatever just expose this about ourselves much more than they create any sort of deficiency. We still can't see ourselves for what we really are. Faith and belief are just part of it all and in some cases, a necessary part of life. I don't think it's ever going away, but we are still an immature species that does a lot of horrible things. Even without religious faith, we'd still have the same problems because they are human problems. I think religion gets too much of the blame for this and the human condition doesn't get enough.
I don't generally see a problem in having "faith" in something without evidence if that thing is unknowable. Lots of things used to be unknowable before we discovered them, but they were true the whole time.
The bottom line is we all have faith in something. It's not possible to NOT have faith in something because we don't know a lot of things and may never be able to know many things particularly what's going on in the head of another person. Faith is required in dealings with other people. Without that, we wouldn't be able to have relationships of any nature and would probably be a lot worse off.
I used to believe in Santa Claus too because that is what my family instilled my mind that Santa is real... not until I caught my granny deposited candies, chocolates, money on the sock I hanged ... thats where I stopped believing about the notion of Santa... but that experienced was soooo fun... as a kid, I was very happy believing that Santa dropped by at the house to gave me goodies 😁😁.. thanks to my granny to that wonderful memories..
In time Gohan.. and I do hope so too😊... thank you for your prediction.😊
We may be at point of terminal disagreement Mike, which is not a problem, but it might be the situation.
What you are doing in the universal application of faith to all people OR ELSE... strikes me as being somewhat epistemically challenged in an area that I am not, a very specific area. It is possible to think things hold sway in the universe without believing-in them. You can learn things, and in closed systems, this knowledge is the very meaning of eternal truth (like the sentence 2+2=4; if Jesus materializes and adds 2+2 to = 5, He is in error). You can operate on principles, use them, without believing-in them. If something is real, it exists with or without your belief. If you have a belief structure - which obviously most people do, the confirmation bias fallacy is completely unavoidable as you shall filter all of your experiences through those structures. This is why I've been known to say things like if you want to have any chance of ever knowing God (or gods), you need to first discard all of your beliefs. A full cup (of belief) can't take in anything else (like thoughts or realities that would void or contradict your beliefs). No sir - everyone does not have faith and it doesn't mean we can't drive or try to vote for the person we THINK has the best chance of not being a corrupt rotten (orange?) bastard. The bottom line is that anytime you find yourself authoring a sentence that starts with the words 'we all...', you're on very thin truth-ice. We can, and some people do, have no faith, but we still have friends, and when the traffic lights don't work (apply mutatis mutandis to all situations), which in fact sometimes they don't, we few brave depraved faithless degenerates don't have to change our shorts (and maybe we are less likely to crash in the intersection(?)).
If you want to see real faith in action, have a look at a suicide bomber.
I agree with the assertion about confirmation bias. I do have beliefs, but they are not set in stone by any means. I've changed them on many occasions and am used to having to do that when it's necessary to do so. I have discarded beliefs many times and probably will many more times as I am always prepared for something to throw a monkey wrench into all of it and make me rethink my position. That doesn't mean I will believe ANY other position, though.
I think so because we all do have faith in something. It is unavoidable. There are degrees to everything. Suicide bombers are far from the only example of faith. It is the extreme and you are trying to throw ALL faith into that basket which is in error IMO. You can't just reduce all faith to the lowest common denominator like that.
It is faith. If you want to call it trust or assumptions, whatever, but we have to assume things to be true to some degree or we'd all be scared of everything as you eluded to in a mockingly way. Sure it's faith. We can disagree and it's fine, but there are different degrees and kinds of faith. Having confidence in a person and his/her trustworthiness is a faith-based assumption that remains until given reason to abandon that faith since the truth of the matter has been revealed and one's faith has been misplaced.
Even a thing like a car. I have faith that my car will start when I turn the key otherwise, I don't take it out anywhere until that faith is restored. Whatever word you want to use, we make faith-like assumptions all the time. Dismissing it all because suicide bombers are the only example you're willing to accept is fine, but it is not reasonable to me. We can disagree and that's fine. I enjoy the challenge you present to my views and I love being made to think. I just feel that you're taking "faith" to the absolute extreme of the worst possible examples and trying to paint ALL faith with the same brush. It just doesn't work, IMO. It doesn't work with anything really.
Is it also fair to declare love to be ONLY meaningless and painful because that's all (broken hearts, betrayal etc) one may know of it? Is it fair to declare hatred as ONLY dangerous and destructive because it is the most popular manifestation of it (it's bad only) when it's pretty clear that it can also be a positive thing?
Your car has the same odds of starting with or without your faith in it. Reality remains the real with or without your faith in it. The slippery slope of faith leads downhill to where the suicide bomber awaits his 99 virgins in heaven (wouldn't it be funny if it were true, and they were all pimple faced douche-bags playing Dungeons And Dragons (I've always thought three smokin' hot talented sluts in lingerie on fist-fulls of molly would be a better reward)). The example taken to the dark extreme is an example of faith properly so called, whereas the acceptance of the conditioned human responses to the uniformity of nature can come down to a semantic difference, and the word 'faith' can easily be replaced with another, more syntactically specific word.
I agree that faith isn't always and only bad, which is why I said above, "Properly employed it makes the faithful a kinder, less suicidal person." Telling one's self the right lies can definitely make the human experience less painful and constantly uncanny. It just isn't the path for me.
I think maybe our differences are more in how we are defining the words. It's not that I think my faith in the car has any bearing on whether or not it starts because I most certainly don't believe that. However, I have to make the assumption that it is true every time I use it. If I can't confidently make that assumption, then that lack of trust (faith) will affect my decision on whether or not to go out using that car. My faith in the car's ability to function properly and not fail affects how I deal with the situation, but it doesn't affect the car at all. We're in agreement there fully and the same goes for reality.
Having faith in something whether it's a person, thing or whatever it is does not give me any illusion that I am changing reality with my faith. To me, it just seems to be a necessary part of reality that is done most of the time without even thinking about it. I have faith that when I walk across a wooden bridge that it won't collapse under me. The "faith" does not affect whether or not that happens, but it does affect whether or not I will attempt to walk across it.
So, it's hard for me to see that as a way of lying to myself about anything. I agree that there are synonyms for "faith" that would be more palpable for folks such as yourself, but I think we may be quibbling over semantics here to some degree.
A similar (although completely different) difference in word use between us is with the word 'argument.' I was using it in its classic meaning, the logical presentation of one's side of something. It carries no negative connotation in my own personal dyslexicon.
One of the alienating aspects of studying philosophy (and specifically logic) is the disambiguated way I have learned to use words as compared to most others. From where I'm sitting, you are defending 'faith' through many small equivocations and sophisticated would-be arguments, probably because you love the word and want to "believe in its power." I do not. I'm using it far more literally and with a precise range of defining ambiguity, beyond which its use is poetic and justifies some remaining level of mythic superstition, which I personally divorced as a child. You can use it. I don't think less of you. I don't use it. I have no faith in reality because reality simply is what there is, and similarly that word, methinks, only means what it means. The attempted extension of it to one's everyday functioning as a being in the world seems superfluous at best. I definitely work with probabilities as opposed to belief-in, aka faith, for accuracy's sake. I think that people that take great pains to eliminate belief from their lives find that their (Freudian) sub-conscious minds evaporate in the bargain, which is another benefit of it, along with having nothing for confirmation bias to confirm.
In no uncertain terms, if we were to poll any group of human beings (outside of continental philosophy departments) to decide the issue, you'd win the argument, yet I stand by my position.
Well, "winning" an argument doesn't necessarily mean the winner is right. I get your use of "argument" now, btw. Fair enough. I think it just hits my ear differently to say you are presenting your argument vs. we're having an argument.
No, I have no specific "love" for the word faith. I could just as easily say I trust that my car will start or I assume that my car will start. To me, these can be used interchangeably as they all pretty much mean the same thing. I don't necessarily assign any religious or mystical gloss to it and certainly not in this instance.
I do have beliefs in "otherworldly" things and if you want to call that faith, I can't stop you. However, my beliefs in those things confer no real benefit to me. I don't stand to gain anything from them like a heaven with 99 virgins or something like that. I'm just trying to figure things out as best I can and so, I'm not so invested in them that I can't be open to other possibilities at some point since I stand to gain nothing from them at all.
I think I chose to use the interchangeable "faith" because you brought it up before that, but it makes no difference to me whether that word is used or not. Probabilities is also accurate descriptor.
On the 99 virgins thing, that's not so great a gift really. You can only use them once before the virgins are "broken", then what? Do you think God gives out refunds? What's his return policy? What if the catch was that in the afterlife, you have no penis. What will you do with all the virgins then? Maybe you do have one, but you're impotent. Actually, that's more like hell. lol .. See, this is the stuff I would want to get in writing before committing.
I'll take another crack at this: I do not think that you must have a moment of soul searching, either once for all time or every time you approach your car, wherein you must decide whether or not you trust or have faith in it starting. If you do, you and I are just way different folk. I think you just need to go somewhere of driving distance so you turn the key to start that bad boy. Case in point: this, my first Wisconsin Winter, took a toll on my punk rock pickup, in that when the temperature dropped below -15f it would kill the battery, most of the time. Many mornings I tried the key with the expectation that it might or might not start, but I tried it anyways. No need for faith or trust. Hoping for the best, yes. Conditioned psychologically, damned tootin'.
Point two: for faith to mean something, it can't mean everything. On this note perhaps it's a more special word for me than for most other people who have not taught a philosophy of religion course, and studied (arguably WAY too much) philosophy of language. To spread usage to mean you are a being in the world and there is a uniformity of causation in the world is like saying all people are beautiful. If all people are beautiful, the word beautiful then means nothing.
Faith is to belief-in
-as-
probability is to thinking-it-so.
Hmm... well, right now, I would make a very confident (without thinking about it) assumption that if I went outside right now, my car would start without issue and I would probably be right. I'm sure you've had temperamental cars before or a car that had some issue that was hard to nail down and had the potential of stranding you somewhere undesirable. In that case, I wouldn't be to confident in using that car and in that situation, I would have a moment of dread as I walked to the car wondering if it's going to start or not.
My first car was a 1990 Pontiac Sunbird that had such an issue (turned out it was a heat-damaged chip in the distributor cap that would randomly decide to stop working right, then randomly start working again), so it certainly made me think twice before going somewhere that would require me to shut the car off because maybe it won't start again for awhile and maybe it's better to just stay home. My current car is more reliable and I don't have those concerns, so I have full trust in this car that it will start and it's just automatic. I don't have to re-decide every time, but I assume it to be true that it will without question even though I really have no evidence that it will start except that it did the last time which has no bearing on whether it will or not this time.
Anyway, I generally agree with what you're saying, so perhaps that's good enough. :)
Wow, you taught a philosophy of religion course and did all that studying? I don't consider myself anywhere near that level of knowledge, so I'm a little surprised that I can hold your attention at all. lol
No, it certainly cannot mean everything and you're absolutely right about your "beautiful" comments. The word "ugly" would also be meaningless. It's the Yin-Yang argument and I agree with you there. Perhaps I am trivializing "faith" by equating it with too many other words, but I have trouble finding any difference (to me) significant enough to separate them as being unrelated.
Faith to me is almost the same as trust. If I trust you, then I have faith that you're a good person and that person I believe you to be is really who you are and I'm not being duped because really, I can never know for sure what's going on in your head or what your intentions are, so I have to trust (have faith in) you in your words and trust (have faith in) my ability to accurately assess you as a good person.
I can see that using "faith" isn't really necessary at all, though.
Okay, so, explain the difference between "belief-in" and "thinking-it-so" as they seem almost the same. If I "believe" that the sun will come up tomorrow, isn't it the same as "thinking-it-so?" The probability is that the sun will come up tomorrow, so how is that different enough from saying that you believe the sun will come up tomorrow?
Belief-in is a further commitment, and requires one not know it to be so (I also taught an epistemology class one semester). At first it seems like a hair splitting scenario, but think about it: the requirement to be a Christian is belief in XY & Z, not thinking it more likely than not. People are free to use words loosely, and so much the worse for the words. We think in words. WE THINK IN WORDS. The precision of our thoughts can be no more than the precision of our words.
All of this amounts to an existential comportment towards our present lived in moment of Being, Dasein, the being of the human being. We are beings-in-the-World, not because we have faith in it, but because we were thrown into this human condition. It is a product of our thrownness, not our faith. A veritable cottage industry of 'metaphysical books' pushes your exact position on faith, and they'd like to sell you your soul for a goat, but I'll outlive them all (crap - that's a Pantera lyric - hahahaha).
I'm tired, punchy and still a little hung over from last nite's pills and booze, and this conversation would be much easier in person.
Yeah, I think I've reached my limit here. I think I understand what you're saying, though. You really take me to the edge of my abilities in this area as I am just an amateur when it comes to philosophy, but I like to try to learn and I must be doing something right if I can hang with someone of your qualifications at all.
I don't think having faith creates anything or makes anything happen. It only affects the person having the faith. Maybe it's a placebo effect. I find the placebo effect to be a fascinating thing, though.
By the way, what is up with your knee? Chronic injury?
Both my knees are a mess. A week ago my left knee cap popped up on its side like a shark fin, putting mad pressure on all it's components in the form of a dislocation. The swelling pushed things apart, and as it went down from time and ice, it left the screw that holds my tibia to my fibula protruding menacingly underneath the scarred up skin (the whole assembly having been re-engineered some 15 years ago in a 9 hour long surgery). Well, I got good and loaded, all itchy and stuff, and used a rubber mallet to press the screw back in where it's supposed to go, taped a quarter tightly over the top of it, and have been consuming loads of calcium with hopes that it might help cement it in place (and mass quantities of pills and booze with hopes that I won't feel too much, and some pot to help forget whatever of that I cannot dodge.) So far so good? Ugh, maybe...
Total: 156886
In all seriousness, my family was out of town for The Paint Horse Association's National Championship horse show every year on my birthday, so now it is an annual source of depression when it rolls around. When people give me stuff on it I wonder why we don't just give people stuff for any or no reason, at any time. I feel ashamed. I feel they succumbed to the societal pressure called 'tradition' and gifts only make me feel worse. I usually don't tell anyone when it is.
Nothing...
I dont expect any presents..and its not important at all.. it is always like a normal day.. I dont even want everbody's birthday wishes, so, I usually deactivate my facebook account the whole birthday month.. so no one will remember... of course, some friends do remember but at least they could not post anything on my wall .. 😁
I would rather be left alone. Tend to agree that it's just another day. When I was younger, I wanted stuff for my birthday. As I got older, I just don't care anymore. I don't want anything. Of course, the downside is I forget other people's birthdays because I don't find mine to be important at all.
It would be okay to go to lunch or dinner with a few people close to me, though. That's low-key. I'm not that special really. :P
I wish to dispute that last sentence man.
I like both of you humans.
I'm way too panick-attacky for birthday dinners. So much pressure. Such a waste of good intentions on a being that is appreciative of the gesture while unable to enjoy it. Any other night of the year I can enjoy dinner with friends, but it's the whole birthday depression garbage that makes the birthday dinner prospect torturous.
Other people's birthday dinners can be fun, depending on the alignment of the stars of course.
The only thing that usually happens on my birthday (or hers) is my Mom and I go out to lunch or something usually. I have a cousin who's birthday is one day before mine and we used to get some of the family together and go out to lunch somewhere. All of that is fine to me because there is never much focus on the "birthday" part of it. No singing or candles or anything. Maybe a couple cards, but all in all, it's just a nice lunch with people I know.
I kind of view my birthday the same as any other holiday. I hate christmas for example. I hate it for many reasons, but for me, it's just a day I get to see my family. Nothing else. It's all in how I choose to see those days. When I was like 16, we went out for lunch somewhere and they had the servers and stuff come over to the table doing their clapping and loud singing "Happy Birthday" and I was SO pissed! I told her not to EVER do that to me again! I hated it so much and I don't think I ever liked birthdays much after that. Now that I'm 39, I really don't like them. It's not that I have anxiety about getting older because I don't really FEEL all that different than I did 15-20 years ago (aside from being much wiser), but I do hate being the center of attention and being "celebrated" for something I see no meaning in.
I think I might find my wedding anniversary special (I've never had one of those yet!) or anything involving a wife, but other than that, I don't think so.
Just thinking about why I hate christmas so much. You know, it's not in the bible ANYWHERE? It's completely made up and has no biblical basis whatsoever.. literally NONE. Totally made up, yet the God of the Bible explicitly says NOT to worship him in any old way they want, but only in the ways HE specifies. His feasts and festivals, but nothing else. Very specific instructions, yet christians just decide they know better and do whatever they want anyway in total defiance to their God. Hilarious, right? Really ticked me off while I was "trying" to believe all that stuff. They don't even know what their book says or they only care about the parts they like.
Then, there's Santa.. why do christians like Santa Claus? It's just "Satan Claws" with the letters rearranged and slightly changed. They must all want Satan's Claws digging into their children, right?
The lights are pretty, but the rest is garbage and just tells the whole world that they don't really believe the stuff themselves. They would be more obedient to their God's commands instead of adhering to their traditions instead. Funny, that's exactly what the Pharisees did. Jesus hated them. Called them a "brood of vipers" which would have been a pretty serious insult back then.
Meh, they just make it up as they go along. Anyway, sorry I went off topic a (lot) little.
I can relate to that Gohan... so , I have to say something😆... I used to be very committed in my custom about Christmas.. like I heard night mass every 24th of December every year... ALONE...(because I cannot dragged my ex bf to attend the mass because he enjoyed more on his friends).. so, I usually went alone every year,and I noticed that all the church-goers are mostly with their families, with their childrens and grand childrens, boyfriends and girlfriends, couples.. and I was just alone... (it made me envy to them most of the time) I wished nothing but to have "someone" I can bring on that special day..but it never happened.. I became single for many years and yet I continue to hear mass during christmas days..- same scenario, same people and same me being alone again... I got tired..not from attending the mass but from my situation.. .why would I always go alone?.. when will be the right time I can hear mass on christmas eve that I have someone with?...is something I always ask for..
So, just last Christmas eve, I stopped from going to church... what for? If I have to feel the same sentiment.. so, what I did, i slept very early, I didn't even heard my neice calling me when the clock turned to 12... I cannot hear any fireworks too...
Thats the time I realized christmas is not for all.. it is not for all who wants to celebrate christmas because there are lonely souls like me that can never appreciate the season for the moment...its sad because a lot of people are not that happy during holiday season... many suffered from being lonely, from being broken, from being away from their family, saddest and worst is, there are people who lost their love ones on the day of christmas... so its sad... not all people have to celebrate christmas...
So, am not really fond about holidays and on every occasions... its just normal day for me..
The Holidays have the highest rate of suicide of the year.
I used to go to Xmas mass with my Mom, but I just get so irritated listening to it because I've read the Bible and I think to myself "No! That is NOT what it says!" and I can't talk to anyone because they're all eating it up since it's what they want to hear.
Meh! I guess ignorance really is bliss sometimes. I can't go back now. Just another reason I turned away from religion entirely, but have remained deeply spiritual in some ways. Maybe even more so without religion.
If I had a special someone, I'd just want to stay home with her which is somewhere I'd actually want to be. It's way more fun.
Hey Mike, this (below) is my Dec 4th post - thought you might find it interesting:
Title: Notta Big Fan
When one's family is nothing but tragedy, the holidays are nothing but a source of the sort of pain that makes it no wonder 'tis the season with the highest suicide rate. I'm also against dishonesty and find it odd we teach children to have faith in a Santa lie on this particular day, without too much thought to larger adult parallels of playing make-believe with faith in our lies. The idea of mating our retail economy's yearly savior with the birth of Christ is appalling, and I'm not even sort of a Christian (but I do use reason well, and I know right from wrong). I'm looking forward to surviving this dark hypocritical season and spanning time in 2019. To all you lovers of Christmas, well, enjoy what you have and have a Merry Christmas.
Yeah, it's weird. Why make children focus on something that can actually proven to be false? There is no Santa and there's no one living at the north pole. There really isn't any subjective wiggle room there like there is with matters dealing with potentially existing realms or beings currently beyond our perception. Santa? Why would they encourage kids to believe in Santa and not focus more on Christ? Not only more, but entirely?
There's so much about religion that makes no sense to me. The Santa thing is one. Isn't he the definition of a false god? Encouraging kids to believe something that you, as a parent, KNOW is FALSE? Why would you encourage your kids to believe things that are objectively lies? Why? Doesn't God tell them not to lie? They do it to their kids.
I also agree that it's all about making money, these holidays. That's why you start seeing Christmas stuff being sold in stores in F'in November right after Halloween. It's all about money. Everything is. They should be outraged by having their savior and his followers exploited so corporations can make millions, but they're not. It's so funny. They make up a holiday that has nothing to do with Christ or God and then allow it to be used for exploitation. That's love for ya!
Also, Christ wasn't a Christian and that's not even his real name. The greeks gave him the name Jesus only it was Iesus since the letter "J" didn't even exist at the time. "Yahushua" was a loyal Jew, so why would he create a religion for people to follow that he didn't even belong to? So many things and so little sense.
Anyway, while holidays can remind people of what they have, it can also remind people of what they don't have as Gab eluded to. Like most things, I guess it's a matter of perspective. I don't happen to like religious holidays because of all the hypocrisy. Hell, Easter isn't in the Bible either. The two most prominent "christian" holidays aren't christian at all. I was interested in knowing the Hebrew "God" enough to read the book and find out the truth of what it says, so why don't most christians seem to do that? Meh! It's all built on lies, all this stuff. Christians invent lies and believe them which, to me, is a rejection of God in favor of tradition. Christians may just be the modern day Pharisees. God commands one thing and christians say "Wellll we're gonna do this other thing instead. Praise Jesus!"
I really hate christmas. Easter doesn't get on my nerves as much for some reason, but both are pagan in origin.
What about New Year, Valentine's, Holy week, all Souls and Saints day... how do you deal with these occasions Gohan?
I go up on my roof and fart into a megaphone with the volume turned all the way up. Actually, I don't even know when the last two happen. lol .. and I don't have a megaphone. :( .. but I would totally do that if I did.
I like hitting golf balls off the roof with my 3 wood (I can't smack a driver for shit).
Easter comes from the "pagan" rites of Estrus (scare quotes on 'pagan' because what could be more pagan than the sacrificial death of God?).
I think there's some bizarre ironic honesty in the Santa lie and the lies they're telling themselves they believe. I personally don't find the Christ lie any better than the Santa lie, but that's just me. I might just be funny like that.
Fat Tuesday is my fave religious holiday - although the Christians think it's followed by Ash Wednesday, I prefer to think of it as followed by 4 Alarm Hangover Wednesday.
I;m smashed; my knee is fucked, and I'm gonna go pass out now.
The only thing I find amusing about Xmas and New Years are .. am being surrounded with FOOD🍝🍛🎂🍤🍩🍖🍕🍗.. I cannot resist it.. it just sooooo fun to eat😁..it totally destroy my diet scheme😁.
I date and pamper myself on Valentine's day since I dont have a bf..
(attending mass, go to massage parlor, eating street food, watching acoustic band while emoting😢😁)..
I do rituals during holy thursday .. there are spots here (in our place where people could penitence) including on good Friday..
All Souls Day is the only day I could visit those departed love ones, so, i make it sure, I wont miss this day..
Well, with Christ, there seems to be almost complete agreement in the historicity of the man referred to as "Jesus" in the scriptures. This man certainly did exist, was baptized by John the Baptist (described by Jesus in the bible as the reincarnation of Elijah the Prophet) and he was crucified by Pontius Pilate. So, at least the man DID exist and walk the earth. Any claims or theories of non-existence have been effectively refuted at this point.
The points of disagreement arise with regards to the details of his life and supernatural events attributed to him. Some other things do seem relatively certain, though. Jesus was a Galilean Jew and lived most of his life in Judea and Galilee, he had followers (disciples), he was involved in some controversy in the temple, he was crucified by the Romans and his disciples continued after his death with some of them being persecuted. Those are not universally believed like the previous two certain things, though.
With Santa, what historical evidence is there for him? None.. at all. At least the man "Jesus" actually walked the earth. Santa and his flying reindeer not so much. It's a complete lie that children are encouraged to believe anyway. Parents even put "Santa" on their presents. Why? I never understood this. Why go so far to deceive a child?
As for Gab. :P
Yes, I pig out on Xmas and Easter dinner, but I prepare for that in the days before by eating even less than usual. I don't have any guilt then. :P New Years there's no feast for me. Just another day.
I don't even pay attention to Valentine's Day really and I don't get into the religious stuff at all. Maybe you'll have a Valentine in 2020, though!
People are free to believe in whatever lies they want - look up Saint Nicholas of Myra (aka Nicholas of Bari, aka Santa MF'n Claus). Equal footing was my claim. The supernatural attributes are the whole thing for Jesus to be Christ - lots of human beings were crucified, persecuted, etc., and you might look into the debunking of nearly all the sources for what we "know" about Jesus the man - I mean, if you're bored or interested or something...
"Why go so far to deceive a child?"
Because it's fun and easy?
Really all faith is a self deception. It stands juxtaposed against thinking and knowing. Properly employed it makes the faithful a kinder, less suicidal person.
Yes, there are many disagreements about the personal details of his life. The "complete agreement" is among scholars and historians both religious and non-religious.
I see your point about Saint Nicholas. I guess what I'm saying is that is Santa actually did exist, we could find him at the north pole or at least some remnants of what would be a huge house with a factory and little elf corpses. Also, flying reindeer and one with a light bulb for a nose.
With Jesus, what evidence would even be left now if he rose from the dead, walked on water or turned water into wine? It's not like people back then could just whip out their smart phones and start recording video to upload to the internet. Even if he really did all those things, there wouldn't be any evidence now that they ever happened.
On top of that, all but a small minority of people back then were completely illiterate and would not be writing anything down. Of course, it's still highly unlikely and I tend not to believe any of that stuff literally happened.
To me, rising from the dead, walking on water and all these other miraculous claims are abstract allegories used to describe states of psychological being. Not literally true, but metaphorically true. Ascension to a higher state of being or consciousness. Shedding old skin and being reborn into a new you. That's part of what the resurrection is all about to me, but of course, I also believe in reincarnation, so it holds meaning for me there as well. I can't prove it, of course. :) Just one of those unknowable things I happen to think is possible that some part of us lives on after the body dies.
Well, I have faith in all kinds of things as does everyone. I have faith that when I go to the store, the other people there aren't going to kill me. I have faith that other drivers on the road are sober and that traffic lights won't malfunction.
Romantic relationships are all about having "faith" in the other person that they aren't going to lie and cheat on you. Worldviews require faith. We have faith that politicians and governments will do the right thing. What evidence is there to believe that they are true before believing? People continue to believe some of those things even when there is evidence to contradict it. Maybe you're believing lies, maybe you're not. "Faith" and "Trust" aren't really that dissimilar. Things like religion, politics and whatever just expose this about ourselves much more than they create any sort of deficiency. We still can't see ourselves for what we really are. Faith and belief are just part of it all and in some cases, a necessary part of life. I don't think it's ever going away, but we are still an immature species that does a lot of horrible things. Even without religious faith, we'd still have the same problems because they are human problems. I think religion gets too much of the blame for this and the human condition doesn't get enough.
I don't generally see a problem in having "faith" in something without evidence if that thing is unknowable. Lots of things used to be unknowable before we discovered them, but they were true the whole time.
The bottom line is we all have faith in something. It's not possible to NOT have faith in something because we don't know a lot of things and may never be able to know many things particularly what's going on in the head of another person. Faith is required in dealings with other people. Without that, we wouldn't be able to have relationships of any nature and would probably be a lot worse off.
I used to believe in Santa Claus too because that is what my family instilled my mind that Santa is real... not until I caught my granny deposited candies, chocolates, money on the sock I hanged ... thats where I stopped believing about the notion of Santa... but that experienced was soooo fun... as a kid, I was very happy believing that Santa dropped by at the house to gave me goodies 😁😁.. thanks to my granny to that wonderful memories..
In time Gohan.. and I do hope so too😊... thank you for your prediction.😊
We may be at point of terminal disagreement Mike, which is not a problem, but it might be the situation.
What you are doing in the universal application of faith to all people OR ELSE... strikes me as being somewhat epistemically challenged in an area that I am not, a very specific area. It is possible to think things hold sway in the universe without believing-in them. You can learn things, and in closed systems, this knowledge is the very meaning of eternal truth (like the sentence 2+2=4; if Jesus materializes and adds 2+2 to = 5, He is in error). You can operate on principles, use them, without believing-in them. If something is real, it exists with or without your belief. If you have a belief structure - which obviously most people do, the confirmation bias fallacy is completely unavoidable as you shall filter all of your experiences through those structures. This is why I've been known to say things like if you want to have any chance of ever knowing God (or gods), you need to first discard all of your beliefs. A full cup (of belief) can't take in anything else (like thoughts or realities that would void or contradict your beliefs). No sir - everyone does not have faith and it doesn't mean we can't drive or try to vote for the person we THINK has the best chance of not being a corrupt rotten (orange?) bastard. The bottom line is that anytime you find yourself authoring a sentence that starts with the words 'we all...', you're on very thin truth-ice. We can, and some people do, have no faith, but we still have friends, and when the traffic lights don't work (apply mutatis mutandis to all situations), which in fact sometimes they don't, we few brave depraved faithless degenerates don't have to change our shorts (and maybe we are less likely to crash in the intersection(?)).
If you want to see real faith in action, have a look at a suicide bomber.
I agree with the assertion about confirmation bias. I do have beliefs, but they are not set in stone by any means. I've changed them on many occasions and am used to having to do that when it's necessary to do so. I have discarded beliefs many times and probably will many more times as I am always prepared for something to throw a monkey wrench into all of it and make me rethink my position. That doesn't mean I will believe ANY other position, though.
I think so because we all do have faith in something. It is unavoidable. There are degrees to everything. Suicide bombers are far from the only example of faith. It is the extreme and you are trying to throw ALL faith into that basket which is in error IMO. You can't just reduce all faith to the lowest common denominator like that.
It is faith. If you want to call it trust or assumptions, whatever, but we have to assume things to be true to some degree or we'd all be scared of everything as you eluded to in a mockingly way. Sure it's faith. We can disagree and it's fine, but there are different degrees and kinds of faith. Having confidence in a person and his/her trustworthiness is a faith-based assumption that remains until given reason to abandon that faith since the truth of the matter has been revealed and one's faith has been misplaced.
Even a thing like a car. I have faith that my car will start when I turn the key otherwise, I don't take it out anywhere until that faith is restored. Whatever word you want to use, we make faith-like assumptions all the time. Dismissing it all because suicide bombers are the only example you're willing to accept is fine, but it is not reasonable to me. We can disagree and that's fine. I enjoy the challenge you present to my views and I love being made to think. I just feel that you're taking "faith" to the absolute extreme of the worst possible examples and trying to paint ALL faith with the same brush. It just doesn't work, IMO. It doesn't work with anything really.
Is it also fair to declare love to be ONLY meaningless and painful because that's all (broken hearts, betrayal etc) one may know of it? Is it fair to declare hatred as ONLY dangerous and destructive because it is the most popular manifestation of it (it's bad only) when it's pretty clear that it can also be a positive thing?
Your car has the same odds of starting with or without your faith in it. Reality remains the real with or without your faith in it. The slippery slope of faith leads downhill to where the suicide bomber awaits his 99 virgins in heaven (wouldn't it be funny if it were true, and they were all pimple faced douche-bags playing Dungeons And Dragons (I've always thought three smokin' hot talented sluts in lingerie on fist-fulls of molly would be a better reward)). The example taken to the dark extreme is an example of faith properly so called, whereas the acceptance of the conditioned human responses to the uniformity of nature can come down to a semantic difference, and the word 'faith' can easily be replaced with another, more syntactically specific word.
I agree that faith isn't always and only bad, which is why I said above, "Properly employed it makes the faithful a kinder, less suicidal person." Telling one's self the right lies can definitely make the human experience less painful and constantly uncanny. It just isn't the path for me.
I think maybe our differences are more in how we are defining the words. It's not that I think my faith in the car has any bearing on whether or not it starts because I most certainly don't believe that. However, I have to make the assumption that it is true every time I use it. If I can't confidently make that assumption, then that lack of trust (faith) will affect my decision on whether or not to go out using that car. My faith in the car's ability to function properly and not fail affects how I deal with the situation, but it doesn't affect the car at all. We're in agreement there fully and the same goes for reality.
Having faith in something whether it's a person, thing or whatever it is does not give me any illusion that I am changing reality with my faith. To me, it just seems to be a necessary part of reality that is done most of the time without even thinking about it. I have faith that when I walk across a wooden bridge that it won't collapse under me. The "faith" does not affect whether or not that happens, but it does affect whether or not I will attempt to walk across it.
So, it's hard for me to see that as a way of lying to myself about anything. I agree that there are synonyms for "faith" that would be more palpable for folks such as yourself, but I think we may be quibbling over semantics here to some degree.
A similar (although completely different) difference in word use between us is with the word 'argument.' I was using it in its classic meaning, the logical presentation of one's side of something. It carries no negative connotation in my own personal dyslexicon.
One of the alienating aspects of studying philosophy (and specifically logic) is the disambiguated way I have learned to use words as compared to most others. From where I'm sitting, you are defending 'faith' through many small equivocations and sophisticated would-be arguments, probably because you love the word and want to "believe in its power." I do not. I'm using it far more literally and with a precise range of defining ambiguity, beyond which its use is poetic and justifies some remaining level of mythic superstition, which I personally divorced as a child. You can use it. I don't think less of you. I don't use it. I have no faith in reality because reality simply is what there is, and similarly that word, methinks, only means what it means. The attempted extension of it to one's everyday functioning as a being in the world seems superfluous at best. I definitely work with probabilities as opposed to belief-in, aka faith, for accuracy's sake. I think that people that take great pains to eliminate belief from their lives find that their (Freudian) sub-conscious minds evaporate in the bargain, which is another benefit of it, along with having nothing for confirmation bias to confirm.
In no uncertain terms, if we were to poll any group of human beings (outside of continental philosophy departments) to decide the issue, you'd win the argument, yet I stand by my position.
Odd man out am I...
Well, "winning" an argument doesn't necessarily mean the winner is right. I get your use of "argument" now, btw. Fair enough. I think it just hits my ear differently to say you are presenting your argument vs. we're having an argument.
No, I have no specific "love" for the word faith. I could just as easily say I trust that my car will start or I assume that my car will start. To me, these can be used interchangeably as they all pretty much mean the same thing. I don't necessarily assign any religious or mystical gloss to it and certainly not in this instance.
I do have beliefs in "otherworldly" things and if you want to call that faith, I can't stop you. However, my beliefs in those things confer no real benefit to me. I don't stand to gain anything from them like a heaven with 99 virgins or something like that. I'm just trying to figure things out as best I can and so, I'm not so invested in them that I can't be open to other possibilities at some point since I stand to gain nothing from them at all.
I think I chose to use the interchangeable "faith" because you brought it up before that, but it makes no difference to me whether that word is used or not. Probabilities is also accurate descriptor.
On the 99 virgins thing, that's not so great a gift really. You can only use them once before the virgins are "broken", then what? Do you think God gives out refunds? What's his return policy? What if the catch was that in the afterlife, you have no penis. What will you do with all the virgins then? Maybe you do have one, but you're impotent. Actually, that's more like hell. lol .. See, this is the stuff I would want to get in writing before committing.
I'll take another crack at this: I do not think that you must have a moment of soul searching, either once for all time or every time you approach your car, wherein you must decide whether or not you trust or have faith in it starting. If you do, you and I are just way different folk. I think you just need to go somewhere of driving distance so you turn the key to start that bad boy. Case in point: this, my first Wisconsin Winter, took a toll on my punk rock pickup, in that when the temperature dropped below -15f it would kill the battery, most of the time. Many mornings I tried the key with the expectation that it might or might not start, but I tried it anyways. No need for faith or trust. Hoping for the best, yes. Conditioned psychologically, damned tootin'.
Point two: for faith to mean something, it can't mean everything. On this note perhaps it's a more special word for me than for most other people who have not taught a philosophy of religion course, and studied (arguably WAY too much) philosophy of language. To spread usage to mean you are a being in the world and there is a uniformity of causation in the world is like saying all people are beautiful. If all people are beautiful, the word beautiful then means nothing.
Faith is to belief-in
-as-
probability is to thinking-it-so.
Hmm... well, right now, I would make a very confident (without thinking about it) assumption that if I went outside right now, my car would start without issue and I would probably be right. I'm sure you've had temperamental cars before or a car that had some issue that was hard to nail down and had the potential of stranding you somewhere undesirable. In that case, I wouldn't be to confident in using that car and in that situation, I would have a moment of dread as I walked to the car wondering if it's going to start or not.
My first car was a 1990 Pontiac Sunbird that had such an issue (turned out it was a heat-damaged chip in the distributor cap that would randomly decide to stop working right, then randomly start working again), so it certainly made me think twice before going somewhere that would require me to shut the car off because maybe it won't start again for awhile and maybe it's better to just stay home. My current car is more reliable and I don't have those concerns, so I have full trust in this car that it will start and it's just automatic. I don't have to re-decide every time, but I assume it to be true that it will without question even though I really have no evidence that it will start except that it did the last time which has no bearing on whether it will or not this time.
Anyway, I generally agree with what you're saying, so perhaps that's good enough. :)
Wow, you taught a philosophy of religion course and did all that studying? I don't consider myself anywhere near that level of knowledge, so I'm a little surprised that I can hold your attention at all. lol
No, it certainly cannot mean everything and you're absolutely right about your "beautiful" comments. The word "ugly" would also be meaningless. It's the Yin-Yang argument and I agree with you there. Perhaps I am trivializing "faith" by equating it with too many other words, but I have trouble finding any difference (to me) significant enough to separate them as being unrelated.
Faith to me is almost the same as trust. If I trust you, then I have faith that you're a good person and that person I believe you to be is really who you are and I'm not being duped because really, I can never know for sure what's going on in your head or what your intentions are, so I have to trust (have faith in) you in your words and trust (have faith in) my ability to accurately assess you as a good person.
I can see that using "faith" isn't really necessary at all, though.
Okay, so, explain the difference between "belief-in" and "thinking-it-so" as they seem almost the same. If I "believe" that the sun will come up tomorrow, isn't it the same as "thinking-it-so?" The probability is that the sun will come up tomorrow, so how is that different enough from saying that you believe the sun will come up tomorrow?
I am probably missing something here, so do tell.
Belief-in is a further commitment, and requires one not know it to be so (I also taught an epistemology class one semester). At first it seems like a hair splitting scenario, but think about it: the requirement to be a Christian is belief in XY & Z, not thinking it more likely than not. People are free to use words loosely, and so much the worse for the words. We think in words. WE THINK IN WORDS. The precision of our thoughts can be no more than the precision of our words.
All of this amounts to an existential comportment towards our present lived in moment of Being, Dasein, the being of the human being. We are beings-in-the-World, not because we have faith in it, but because we were thrown into this human condition. It is a product of our thrownness, not our faith. A veritable cottage industry of 'metaphysical books' pushes your exact position on faith, and they'd like to sell you your soul for a goat, but I'll outlive them all (crap - that's a Pantera lyric - hahahaha).
I'm tired, punchy and still a little hung over from last nite's pills and booze, and this conversation would be much easier in person.
Laters...
Yeah, I think I've reached my limit here. I think I understand what you're saying, though. You really take me to the edge of my abilities in this area as I am just an amateur when it comes to philosophy, but I like to try to learn and I must be doing something right if I can hang with someone of your qualifications at all.
I don't think having faith creates anything or makes anything happen. It only affects the person having the faith. Maybe it's a placebo effect. I find the placebo effect to be a fascinating thing, though.
By the way, what is up with your knee? Chronic injury?
Both my knees are a mess. A week ago my left knee cap popped up on its side like a shark fin, putting mad pressure on all it's components in the form of a dislocation. The swelling pushed things apart, and as it went down from time and ice, it left the screw that holds my tibia to my fibula protruding menacingly underneath the scarred up skin (the whole assembly having been re-engineered some 15 years ago in a 9 hour long surgery). Well, I got good and loaded, all itchy and stuff, and used a rubber mallet to press the screw back in where it's supposed to go, taped a quarter tightly over the top of it, and have been consuming loads of calcium with hopes that it might help cement it in place (and mass quantities of pills and booze with hopes that I won't feel too much, and some pot to help forget whatever of that I cannot dodge.) So far so good? Ugh, maybe...
Getting old sucks.