- #1
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
- 4,446
- 558
So did it evolve or is it natural, i can think of many acts that would test my faith.
Evo said:Faith as in the supernatural?
As long as you do the paperwork...tribdog said:I'm pretty sure Moonbear requires a sacrifice of some type.
In "The Demon Haunted World", Sagan argues that humans have "belief engines". We are pre-programmed for pattern recognition to a degree that causes us to see patterns where none exist in an effort to make sense of what we see. This is where all sorts of beliefs (including faiths) come from.wolram said:So did it evolve or is it natural, i can think of many acts that would test my faith.
Andre said:And Occam Razor of course, if there is a simpler explanation for a problem, choose the simpler. However, if there are two or more different explanations, perhaps, you should not choose in the first place and have so much faith in that, because that's basically a affirming the consequent fallacy.
Occam's razor might be just an idea, but consider how horribly convoluted cosmology has become, with new entities and new freely adjustable parameters introduced to explain every discordant observation. If Occam's razor ever had a ripe target, it is cosmology. Particle physics, quantum theory, condensed-matter physics, and on and on are well-founded, well-motivated, and supported by experimentation. Most of cosmology is inaccessible to experimentation, and necessarily must rely on observation. When observations conflict with theories, it's prudent to engage in epistemology and ask ourselves whether our theories need to be drastically overhauled. Einstein's memoriam on the death of Ernst Mach addressed this need to re-examine theory.wolram said:Occams razor is just an idea and it is just so loaded.
How does it happen that a properly endowed natural scientist comes to concern himself with epistemology? Is there no more valuable work in his specialty? I hear many of my colleagues saying, and I sense it from many more, that they feel this way. I cannot share this sentiment. ... Concepts that have proven useful in ordering things easily achieve such an authority over us that we forget their earthly origins and accept them as unalterable givens. Thus they come to be stamped as 'necessities of thought,' 'a priori givens,' etc. The path of scientific advance is often made impassable for a long time through such errors. For that reason, it is by no means an idle game if we become practiced in analyzing the long common place concepts and exhibiting those circumstances upon which their justification and usefulness depend, how they have grown up, individually, out of the givens of experience. By this means, their all-too-great authority will be broken.
Certainly! That is not an article of faith. As Will Sonnet used to say "No brag, just fact."binzing said:Would Evo be the goddess of clumsiness and self-injury?
Watch for a lightning bolt!binzing said:Would Evo be the goddess of clumsiness and self-injury?
Might I add that she is the goddess of the pratfall (aka Carol Burnett) on PF?Astronuc said:Watch for a lightning bolt!
I see Evo being a combination of Aphrodite (Love and Beauty), Artemis (Forest and Hunt) and Hestia (Home and Hearth).
Yes, that would be me.binzing said:Would Evo be the goddess of clumsiness and self-injury?
Some people disagree, but just to be pedantic, I like to separate faith into a sub-category of belief, with faith requiring an absence of evidence.Andre said:And Occam Razor of course, if there is a simpler explanation for a problem, choose the simpler. However, if there are two or more different explanations, perhaps, you should not choose in the first place and have so much faith in that, because that's basically a affirming the consequent fallacy.
It really is pretty basic: since our belief engines have to assign a cause for every effect, when there is something we don't understand, it becomes convenient to attach a supernatural element to it. That's why basically everything that happened in the natural world used to be attached to the supernatural. People simply didn't understand what was going on and couldn't conceive of a natural explanation, so they attached a supernatural one.Danger said:I absolutely cannot believe that any individual who has not been exposed to the idea from an external influence would ever consider the existence of a supreme being. It's such a ludicrous concept that it takes a society to come up with it.
russ_watters said:That's why basically everything that happened in the natural world used to be attached to the supernatural. People simply didn't understand what was going on and couldn't conceive of a natural explanation, so they attached a supernatural one.
Evo said:Yes, that would be me.
Danger said:I absolutely cannot believe that any individual who has not been exposed to the idea from an external influence would ever consider the existence of a supreme being. It's such a ludicrous concept that it takes a society to come up with it.
I didn't mean it that way. I do think that it is a combination of the two.Danger said:Exactly! People... not a singular person. No isolated individual would think of such a thing.
Astronuc said:Watch for a lightning bolt!
I see Evo being a combination of Aphrodite (Love and Beauty), Artemis (Forest and Hunt) and Hestia (Home and Hearth).
Ivan Seeking said:Also worthy of mention: As I understand it, Sagan had a change of heart about all of this before he died.
Ann Druyan said:Contrary to the fantasies of the fundamentalists, there was no deathbed conversion, no last minute refuge taken in a comforting vision of a heaven or an afterlife. For Carl, what mattered most was what was true, not merely what would make us feel better. Even at this moment when anyone would be forgiven for turning away from the reality of our situation, Carl was unflinching. As we looked deeply into each others eyes, it was with a shared conviction that our wondrous life together was ending forever.
Huckleberry said:I have difficulty believing that the person who loved him most would outright lie about the events of his deathbed. I see no reason to disbelieve her.
I shared something like that with my brother the last time I saw him 4 days before he died, but in my case, it was a realization that I wasn't going to have him around for another 30 or 40 years. For him, it was the realization that he wasn't going to be around for his son who was 3 years old at the time, or his wife.As we looked deeply into each others eyes, it was with a shared conviction that our wondrous life together was ending forever.
wolram said:So did it evolve or is it natural, i can think of many acts that would test my faith.
I don't see what he would have to feel silly about, no more so than anyone else. If there is an afterlife then I don't see how anyone can go into it expecting their worldview to be correct. I would imagine that people who had no tolerance of ideas (fundamentalists) would feel particularly silly. Sagan was agnostic, and a good man; one of the best. He loved the truth.Ivan Seeking said:Agreed. I must have heard something being promoted by some religious group.
I bet he feels pretty silly now.
Faith is the belief or trust in something or someone without the need for proof or evidence.
This is a highly debated topic among scientists and philosophers. Some argue that faith is a natural part of human psychology and evolved as a survival mechanism. Others believe that faith is a learned behavior influenced by cultural and societal factors.
There is no scientific consensus on whether faith can be fully explained by science. While some aspects of faith, such as the release of certain neurotransmitters in the brain, can be studied and understood scientifically, the concept of faith itself is more abstract and subjective.
Faith can have a significant impact on human behavior, as it often guides people's beliefs, values, and actions. It can provide a sense of purpose and meaning in life, and can also influence decision-making and social interactions.
Yes, faith can evolve over time as a person's beliefs and experiences change. It can also be influenced by external factors such as education, exposure to different cultures, and personal growth. However, whether faith itself evolves as a biological trait is still a subject of debate.