Belief and Faith

[Boo]

I have a few questions for skeptics. When I first joined I read in a post (sorry, I don't remember who it was) that stated "if you tell a skeptic that a lamp is in the next room, they will go look". The implication is that skeptics take nothing on faith.

One question is do you as an individual take anything on faith, do you believe in something/anything without the evidence?

For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status. Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?


In a universe as large as ours many people believe that there must be life somewhere else. Are we alone and unique in our existance?

What would you like to have evidence of? Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?


Boo

 

[Yahweh]

One question is do you as an individual take anything on faith, do you believe in something/anything without the evidence?

Without evidence, no. Without knowledge, occasionally. Theres a difference. Everything I believe is rationalized and based on science. If I dont understand something, it means that the evidence exists, I'm just a little dim to understand it.

For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status.

Interesting, but illfounded. There is no way to answer that because it is a philosophical question, not scientific.

Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?

You might as well have said that in Spanish, while talking to your cat in the dark sitting in your closet. I dont know what you mean by "Do you believe in them".

In a universe as large as ours many people believe that there must be life somewhere else.

I'm dont know enough about the mechanics of xeno-biology to understand that. The universe is billions of years old, trillions of stars per galaxy, millions of galaxies, and a ◊◊◊◊ load of planets... still all that exists in a finite universe (I dont know if we have a finite universe, might be infinite, might implode...)... its not faith that tells me that life exists somewhere else in the universe, its common sense. Also I believe that there is a fair amount of science and chemistry.

Are we alone and unique in our existance?

Thats a rather absurd thing to believe. Theres just an unfathomable number of possibilities. And no, "god made the universe" is not one of them because it is not upheld by science.

What would you like to have evidence of?

I'd like to have evidence that suggests God exists. Real evidence. I've heard too many times "Read the bible" or "Look at everything, its so perfect only a devine creator could have made it". I'm sorry, those are observations with no scientific understanding behind them. Most of the things I hear that involves "Proof god exists" involves cliche phrases or the famous "Just accept it" rebuttle.

Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?

I'd like to believe in the Buffyverse... but... yeah.

 

[Fun2BFree]

I have a few questions for skeptics. When I first joined I read in a post (sorry, I don't remember who it was) that stated "if you tell a skeptic that a lamp is in the next room, they will go look". The implication is that skeptics take nothing on faith.

One question is do you as an individual take anything on faith, do you believe in something/anything without the evidence?

For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status. Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?


In a universe as large as ours many people believe that there must be life somewhere else. Are we alone and unique in our existance?

What would you like to have evidence of? Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?
Boo

There is a language problem her with the words- belief and faith. When a skeptic believes in something or has faith in something we don't mean we believe it the same way that a faith based believer believes it-- believe to have faith in means to have some level of confidence that this is true based on evidence (experience)..So believing a friend might be based on the idea that most people who behave like this friend are truthful most of the time so we can be confident in trusting them..if evidence comes along to show this confidence is poorly founded than an intelligent skeptic will no longer have faith in such persons or people...etc... So this thing about lamps in the other room is sort of silly and simplistic...is the other a room a closet? Then I would be more doubtful and take a look. Is it a regular room where past experience suggests that such a statement is likely true, I might just accept it though I would not bet my whole life about it and devote hours of my time to the notion of a lamp in the other room unless I had much better proof that the lamp was really there and that devoting so much time and effort to the lamp was somehow worthwhile....

so the evidence needed to believer or have faith in something will depend on how out of the ordinary the claim is from everyday existence and how out of the ordinary the consequences of having faith in the thing are...

 

[Phil]

so the evidence needed to believe or have faith in something will depend on how out of the ordinary the claim is from everyday existence and how out of the ordinary the consequences of having faith in the thing are...

I agree, and would add that being skeptical about everything all the time is simply not practical. I don't think you can live a happy life if you're questioning every single thing you encounter, such as the lamp scenario. Many times, it's just not necessary. If this were the case, the 'true' skeptic would even question his or her own skepticism, and become caught in a never-ending loop.

I would wager that for most of the skeptics on this Forum, questioning the claims not handled by 'common sense', at least the ones that affect us directly, is the way we live our lives. And there are enough of those to contemplate without worrying about a lamp.

 

[Fun2BFree]

What would you like to have evidence of? Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?
Boo

I sort of skipped this last question- but the answer is SURE, of course, why not! I would like to believe in a meaningful life after death and all sorts of other untrue things--but being a skeptic means not using wants and desires as any part of determining what is worthy of belief, but basing belief just on the facts.

 

[Yahzi]

IWhat would you like to have evidence of? Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?

The proposition that human beings are capable of rational existance in groups larger than one.

 

[Upchurch]

I have a few questions for skeptics. When I first joined I read in a post (sorry, I don't remember who it was) that stated "if you tell a skeptic that a lamp is in the next room, they will go look". The implication is that skeptics take nothing on faith.

That'd be me.

One question is do you as an individual take anything on faith, do you believe in something/anything without the evidence?

Not really. I may take some things for granted for pragmatic reasons, but if there is a significant reason to consider that belief may be wrong, I do not cling to it for faith's sake.

For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status. Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?

About levels of proof. If everything in this world was falsifiable, then yes, I would hold all things to the same level of proof. However, everything is not falsifiable.

About my friends: My friends become my friends by a history of mutual support (as well as personality factors). There is a history of friend-like behavior when I consider someone my friend. When there is an anti-friend-like behavor in someone I consider a friend, I weigh that versus the body of friend-like behavor and make a value judgement on wether or not I continue to consider them my friend. I do not take them on faith because things can, and sometimes do, change. (I also don't understand the "do you believe in them?" part other than I believe they actually exist.)

In a universe as large as ours many people believe that there must be life somewhere else. Are we alone and unique in our existance?

As no two objects are exactly like any other, yes, we are unique. But that's just my smart-ass answer.

I think we are not alone in the universe.
I believe that we are not alone in the universe
I hope we are not alone in the universe.
I don't know that we are not alone in the universe.
I don't have faith that we are not alone in the universe.

What would you like to have evidence of? Is there something that you want to believe in but can't do to lack of scientific proof?

Other life in this universe. Genuine magic. Absolute good and evil.

I'm sure there are others if I think about it for a while.

 

[Robman75]

What makes a friend?

__________________________________________________
For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status. Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?
__________________________________________________

Of course friends must "prove the qualities you value in a friend" before they reach that "status." I think the word for people you interact with, who have not done so, don't wish to, or you don't wish to, are called acquaintances.

Yes, friends get slack from friends, but only so much. From a stranger or a friend, cries of "pink elephants walking down the street" should be met with equal incredulity.

 

[Boo]

To all those that have replied so far Thank you.

I'll try to make myself a little clearer. In the short time I have been here I have noted a vehemance and almost fanaticism in discussions requiring proof and evidence for ideas and beliefs posted here ( I do not mean this unkindly). I was taken aback by it.

I began to wonder just how skeptical posters were in there everyday life.

There was a time when people that demanded proof were referred to as a "doubting Thomas". I also remember the phrase "I'm from Missouri, the 'show me ' state."

They seemed to describe a willingness to believe, if there was proof. Whereas skepticism appears to be more hard lined look at the world, almost cynical.

I am trying to learn and understand various viewpoints on a wide range of topics and this forum draws from such a diverse group of people. The more information I have the better I can decide for myself what I choose to believe and take on faith or require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.



Boo

 

[Upchurch]

I also remember the phrase "I'm from Missouri, the 'show me ' state."

Hey! Me too!

They seemed to describe a willingness to believe, if there was proof. Whereas skepticism appears to be more hard lined look at the world, almost cynical.

I don't know about cynical, but the thing about the beliefs of a skeptic is that they are always open for review. No belief is taken to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt for ever.

I'm willing to believe in things based on information given, but those believes are always tentative on the arrival of new or better information.

 

[arcticpenguin]

To all those that have replied so far Thank you.

I'll try to make myself a little clearer. In the short time I have been here I have noted a vehemance and almost fanaticism in discussions requiring proof and evidence for ideas and beliefs posted here ( I do not mean this unkindly). I was taken aback by it.

I began to wonder just how skeptical posters were in there everyday life.

There was a time when people that demanded proof were referred to as a "doubting Thomas". I also remember the phrase "I'm from Missouri, the 'show me ' state."

The amount of evidence required scales to the size of the claim. I don't wake up every morning and run through a checklist:
Am I still here? check.
Does the earth still exist? check.
Is my bed still here? check.
Does my job still exist so I can get up and go to work? check?
...

 

[Dancing David]

For example, do you hold your friends to the level of proof that you require in other areas, must they prove the qualities you value in a friend before allowing them that status. Will you take them on faith, do you believe in them?

Boo

Hi Boo, truely great questions! I belive that you can apply science and scepticism to 'spiritual' things.

When it comes to friends, I have learned to be cautious, be friendly to everyone, but be careful who you let into your life.
I take my freinds on faith, but believe me they challenge me as much as anyone on this board.

 

[Boo]

The amount of evidence required scales to the size of the claim. I don't wake up every morning and run through a checklist:
Am I still here? check.
Does the earth still exist? check.
Is my bed still here? check.
Does my job still exist so I can get up and go to work? check?
...

This reminded me of my standard answer to "How are you" by people that don't really want to know....

I have a pulse
I am breathing
I am walking on both legs, unaided
Better then some, no worse then others

AP,
About the amount of evidence to scale of claim. When I am on duty and someone tells me they have pain and rate it on a 1-10 scale. in the abscence of an obvious injury the only information i have to base treatment on is their word. There are of course small clinical signs that can be used as evidence, however what is a 10 to one person maybe only a 4 to someone else. There maybe no clinical evidence that I can evaluate to verify their claim.


It is these type of situations that I am wondering about. Is there a scenario in your life where they maybe little or no evidence to to a claim and you must either choose not to believe what they tell you or take what they say on faith and act on their claim.



Boo

 

[Fun2BFree]

When you talk about believing a person in pain you are talking about applying the science of medicine to a problem...in this case relief of pain. Now pain cannot be measured like temperature or blood pressure so that leaves you with only taking the person's word for it...that is our current state of the art in pain control...believe the patient...It is a good starting place for a patient physician relationship, but like any it is subject to change by more information..does the person have a believable reason for pain like a knife in his head or a cancer?? If not, can any objective evidence be found for the cause? Does this person have a problem with other substance abuse? Is this person generally trustworthy or is he or she a known drug seeker, liar, or drug dealer?? Again all of these are things you collect information about if you are a good physician, ie scientist applying your science...that is not cynical it is sensible...not sure why you find the application of logic, reason and evidence to be cynical...that is an emotional reaction that cannot be supported by the evidence..it exists in your head only. meanwhile the believer tends to accept what is in his head as the truth and then only accepts facts which support that belief, ignoring others or refusing to give fair consideration to others--every thing to keep the belief alive, not examine the evidence...it is a very dangerous and bad habit for a physician.

 

[Boo]

F2BF,

Actually I'm a Paramedic.

Many time I don't know the history of the person I am dealing with and can't get an adequate history. As I said, in the absence of an obvious injury all I have is their word about how much pain they are in.

I used this as an example in a quest for other situations where someone may be a skeptic and yet find themselves taking something as being true without evidence.

As I said earlier, this is a learning process for me. I appreciate all comments and suggestions on how to make my point clearer.


Boo

 

[Yahweh]

AP,
About the amount of evidence to scale of claim. When I am on duty and someone tells me they have pain and rate it on a 1-10 scale. in the abscence of an obvious injury the only information i have to base treatment on is their word. There are of course small clinical signs that can be used as evidence, however what is a 10 to one person maybe only a 4 to someone else. There maybe no clinical evidence that I can evaluate to verify their claim.

Thats just one of those things that cannot be measured because its an idea that exists only in someone's head. Its a lot like the "Laugh-O-Meter" principle, in the years science has been helping us measure things such as light (Lumens), sound (decibles), density (g/cm), mass (kilograms), time (years), length (meters, miles), distance (lightyears, leagues), depth (fathoms), energy (Joules), volume (liters), temperature (Kelvin), etc. etc. but still the only thing we've ever come up with to tell how funny something is the Laugh-O-Meter. I live in the states and it was interesting getting back in touch with the metric system again. See also: The Smell-O-Meter, Rank (on the E! network because their top 25 is always different from mine... and I hate that), How-Hot-Are-You-From-1-To-10, and RateMyKitten.com.

We like to measure things in relation to other common things (I could have made an effort to state that at least minimally scientifically). An example would be the brightness of stars as compared to the brightness of the Sun. Heres a website that explains something about Apparent Brightness and Absolute Brightness of stars: http://physics.njit.edu/~dgary/202/Lecture17.html.