The Sword and Laser discussion

It was bound to come up.

The priest says, after receiving his cruciform pet, "I now understand the need for faith - pure, blind, fly-in-the-face-of-reason faith - as a small life preserver in the wild and endless sea of a universe ruled by unfeeling laws and totally indifferent to the small, reasoning beings that inhabit it."

That struck me as a good nugget to pull from the priest's tale - perhaps what his story is all about. Is this a natural response to such a situation (a la no atheists in foxholes)? Is this a crazy response? Would it be yours?

Does faith have to mean religion? As an atheist I have faith and beliefs in things they just aren't connect to a religion. So I guess even if you don't believe in God in a bad situation people still have faith just in something other than God.

Chickenstitch wrote: "So I guess even if you don't believe in God in a bad situation people still have faith just in something other than God. "

Interesting point. I tend to think of faith in religious terms, yes, but what other cases are you referring to, specifically?

I've had faith in other people, or faith that something will work as advertised. Neither case is necessarily religious. I've also allowed myself, when drunk on manic energy, to believe in fate, which sways into the religious (or at least irrational) category.

I was thinking faith in other people to maybe help/save you or that a plan will work or just an illogical belief everything will be OK. I guess I always like to believe that I'm doing the right thing in difficult situations.

aldenoneil wrote: "Is this a natural response to such a situation (a la no atheists in foxholes)? Is this a crazy response? Would it be yours?"

It's not a crazy response. It's probably a common response. It's definitely not a universal response. Some people have already accepted that the universe is indifferent and uncaring, and there's no indication believers face death any calmer than non-believers do.

As for the "no atheists in foxholes" canard, human beings respond to crises in all kinds of ways. For some people, having no faith is an asset at those times.

I have faith in my fellow humans, well most of you ;-)

The bs "no atheists in foxholes" mantra is thrown out by religious leaders and conservative christians because they can't understand the non-religious mind.

If I'm ever "in a foxhole" or in danger, my faith will be in my training and the training and skills of the men and women who are tasked with saving me, not some supernatural entity.

"I now understand the need for faith - pure, blind, fly-in-the-face-of-reason faith - as a small life preserver in the wild and endless sea of a universe ruled by unfeeling laws and totally indifferent to the small, reasoning beings that inhabit it."

This didn't really ring true for me as a POV character's self examination. "Blind Faith" is what you call other people's faith that you don't agree with. Nobody calls their own faith "blind" whether it be in God or other people or themselves. Anyone who has faith in anything can provide a REASON for their faith.
A skydiver for instance has faith in his equipment - that when he pulls the rip cord everything will work out fine. After a thousand jumps one might argue whether he is acting in faith at all but what about on his first jump? His "faith" was not without "reason" was not blind and was not LESS PURE.
Even scientific progress requires the exercise of faith eg to put a man on the moon you must first have faith that such a thing is possible.

Who says "pure" faith is blind. Isn't faith merely a normal part of human reasoning?

Anyway, point is, faith is not the opposite of reason. In fact one could argue that REASON is based in the FAITH of a rational universe - which some may then further conclude is only meaningful if their exists a rational Creator God who has imposed order/logic on the Universe - while others may simply take a rational universe for granted - So which faith is blind?
Its always the other persons of course.

I said all that to point out that the priests reference to blind faith fails as credible self introspection.

Reason is a response to observed phenomena: we believe the universe is rational because, empirically, it exhibits predictable behaviors. Even when we have found what appear to be unpredictable phenomena, science has found, on deeper examination, the cause and effect mechanisms behind them.

Faith, on the other hand, is an a priori determination which does not rely on empirical observations. It's simply wishful thinking: "I hope this will be so, though I have no evidence for it." If one bases a religion (or any paradigm) on evidence, it's not "faith" any more. This may be why the God of the JC Bible specifically declares He will not 'prove' himself through miracles. To do so would mean faith was unnecessary.

P. Aaron wrote: "Faith, on the other hand, is an a priori determination which does not rely on empirical observations. "

Right, which is why, to your point, David, I do think the priest is seeing blind faith as the purest form, and I find this absolutely in line with his journey.

Practically everything he's seen since encountering the Bikura undermines what he's come to believe about God, and it's that which causes him to believe again. It's paradoxical.

I'd say it's completely unreasonable to encounter something so at odds with your beliefs that it actually renews those beliefs (if altering them somewhat).

The "there are no atheists in a foxhole" line is used to great effect in the song Flyentology by El-P feat. Trent Reznor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWNA-j...

This TED talk really changed how I viewed religion and spirituality. Faith is more than trust, which is what I think David is talking about with the skydiver. Faith necessarily seems irrational, but not really so, because of the spiritual nature of humans. Also, faith seems irrational because our brains tend to be selective towards that which could be harmful, so faith in a positive ethereal experience seems extraordinarily irrational. Whether or not it is rational, though, truly depends on whether or not a spiritual connection is real or not.

P. Aaron wrote: "Reason is a response to observed phenomena: we believe the universe is rational because, empirically, it exhibits predictable behaviors. Even when we have found what appear to be unpredictable phe..."

Hah! In other words you believe the Universe will continue to behave in the UNOBSERVABLE future the same as it has behaved in the past becaue the universe is predictable/rational - And you believe the Universe is predictable/rational because it just is and it will continue to do in the future what it has done in the past. The perfect APRIORI faith based assumption.

The reality is from history, we did not deduce a rational Universe through observation. The assumption of a rational universe (which science depends on) was logically deduced by men like Francis Bacon based on FAITH in a rational God. IE The Creator is rational, therefore His creation must also be rational, meaning it is predictable and therefore discoverable via the scientific method he(Francis Bacon) founded.

Today, the "God" apriori assumption or faith is discarded but the deduction of a rational universe we kept and continue to hold to APRIORI. But it was still inherited from a biblical worldview.

I'm not familiar with the term "JC Bible" but I'm assuming you mean the Christian Bible. Here Christ was basically saying God is self evident and that performing circus tricks would not convince anyone who was in belligerent denial. Infuriating it may be for some but they didn't crucify because they like what he said.

Anyway, my point is you cannot so easily divorce faith from reason, or reason from faith - they are both part of normal human thought process and are both necessary for things like science. What good is reason, or logic, or science if one is not problem solving ie discovering what was previously unobserved and unknown - and why would one assume the unobserved and undiscovered are out there apart from faith?

I actually like the priests story because its entertaining, not because its enlightening or intellectually challenging. I actually think his "theology" is bigoted and illogical, but as its no different to what is dished out in the media and our education systems ie part of the western cultural paradigm - I just look past it to enjoy the story.

David wrote: "Hah! In other words you believe the Universe will continue to behave in the UNOBSERVABLE future the same as it has behaved in the past becaue the universe is predictable/rational - And you believe the Universe is predictable/rational because it just is and it will continue to do in the future what it has done in the past. The perfect APRIORI faith based assumption...."

Er...well, yes, I suppose you could argue that, contrary to all empirical data, the universe might suddenly start behaving in an irrational, non-predictable fashion. There is no percentage in doing so, however. If one were to actually accept such a premise, one would be labelled - accurately, as far as I can read the DSM - psychotic. So no, I think there's a distinction between pure a priori belief in an unobservable numinous, and the a posteriori acceptance of cartesian rationalism.

"....What good is reason, or logic, or science if one is not problem solving ie discovering what was previously unobserved and unknown...."

I'm not certain I understand your question here.

David wrote: "why would one assume the unobserved and undiscovered are out there apart from faith?"

Historical precedent? Many times, the "undiscovered" are actually stumbled upon while looking for something else. This is how the Europeans found the American continents, and how Neptune and Pluto were discovered.

Trial and error are what nature calls evolution.
I guess in the end it does not matter if we believe in gods or not, but whether we choose to use the strength and faith we gather through our belief to help people around us or if we bury ourselves in some enklave. There is no point to religion or science or anything if you there is no one who is observing it.
To get back to the Hyperion story (attention, maybe some spoilers):
I don't believe the bikura symbol means the same the human does. For them, it's just a parasite that keeps them alive. It wouldn't have influenced humankind if Paul Durè wouldn't have discovered it.
But he did and interpreted things into it, that we don't for sure know are true.
And that is just the way it works for us now:
You can choose to interprete faith into the symbol, but you don't need to. You can also see it as a horror story with some zombie/resurrection elements.

Timothy wrote: "Our brains tend to be selective towards that which could be harmful."

I haven't watched the TED talk yet. What is that statement referring to?

The very nature of miracles supercedes the natural universe, yet I don't think the priest intended to spit in the face of science with his remark Perhaps the events he witnessed instilled so much awe that the world that he lived in seemed insignificant at that moment.

Blind faith (ignorant to the world and experiences) is not a faith the priest would not likely live by. But maybe blind faith (trusting there is no miracle too big for God) is.

aldenoneil wrote: "Timothy wrote: "Our brains tend to be selective towards that which could be harmful."

I haven't watched the TED talk yet. What is that statement referring to?"

It's not in the TED talk, and it's not something I can cite quickly. I do remember talking about it in my psychology class, though, and I have heard it mentioned by many people whose opinions I respect, in real life and on the Internet. So, I'm pretty certain it's true.

Here's a PDF of a psychology paper on this effect in a financial context.

My main point is that what one thinks about oneself is dependent on more information that what one has achieved. You can't prove you can do better than you have ever done, because you've never done that. That's the kind of thing you have to take on faith.

I have a very existential view on spirituality, growing up with a schizophrenia you start to see reality a little more fluid. We need faith as a biological impartiality (The God Gene).

Humans are amazing creature we can believe things that are aren't real, its the reason we read, watch tv and play video games. Sure at the end of the game or book you know its not real but for a while it was. Creativity I think stems from believing whats not there could be and then making it so. even if that only in your mind.

I am an Ignostic meaning I will not accept the idea of a god tell its properly defined, but I know personal reality is real. My sister hears voices they are real cause her mind says they are. I meditate and channel my kundalini... that's all real because i see it in my minds eye..... i have no clue where I'm going *sigh*

Chad, I am coming to this thread late, but I really liked your post.