View Single Post
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 02-14-2008, 07:24 PM
Traveler Traveler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,315
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,335 Times in 785 Posts
Laughs: 6
Laughs at 137 Times in 55 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalShadow View Post
First off, I'd like to thank you for your reply as well, it's nice to find a fellow scientist here.

My point with the analysis of your light analogy is that if you define faith that way (as the propensity to act without knowledge and make assumptions based on trends), then I don't see how it applies to religion. I assume that the light switch will turn on the light based on the trend that it almost always turns on the light (unless the light bulb is burnt out), I assume that a religion is true based on the trend ???. There are no direct action to result links that can be made in religion. The only testable conditions a religion provides all happen after you're dead.

I also disagree on your gambling point. I don't think people gamble because they have an ignorance of statistics (or common sense for that matter, casinos obviously make lots of money), I think they gamble because they get addicted to the rush they get when they win against the odds and make money off it. They don't have faith (or make an assumtion) that they will make money.

I think that a better example is religious fanatic terrorists who have faith that killing for their religion is the right thing to do and they will be rewarded for it. We can say how wrong and evil they are from our point of view, but we also had drastically different upbrinings. If you're raised from birth to believe something is true, chances are you will grow up to have an unshakable belief in it. This is supported by the fact that the majority of people are the same religion as their parents (obviously there are exceptions, I'm just observing the majority).

My point is simply that faith can be a dangerous thing and knowing where to place it (if anywhere) is a non-trivial matter to me. I hear people say how strong their faith is and that no matter what is discovered or what evidence comes to light, it would not shake their beliefs, but I don't think I can ever be like that. It seems unscientific to me. There are hunches that you can go on in science, but faced with overwhelming evidence opposing them, I don't see the value in blindly following my original hunch to the exclusion of everything else.

I do completely agree with you on prayer though and I wish more people saw it that way.

And to clarify, I do believe love goes beyond logic, but it is also something that requires two parties. I love my wife more than anything and she can see that in the things I do, just as I can see it in the things she does. My point is that I don't feel love from a higher power, no matter how much I try to give it. You can say that it's because I don't want it enough, just as I can say that you only feel it because you want it so much.

Sorry for the long post, but I really am enjoying this conversation
Again I wish I had more time to converse with you. There is both false faith and false religion just like there are false assumptions in science. For example are dinosaurs warm blooded or cold blooded. Today most scientists will agree that they are warm blooded – 50 years ago most agreed that they were cold blooded.

The problem is that many tend to have faith in “expert” opinion. Few of us have the time and resources to “check out” or validate everything that is being said. Since you are a scientist you will understand the following – I think. It is a template for understanding how G-d deals with man.
  • G-d will not do for man what man is capable of doing for himself.
  • G-d will do for man what man is not capable of doing for himself.
  • G-d will not do for man that which does not benefit man in the long (eternal) term.
  • G-d will do for man that which will benefit man in the long (eternal) term.
  • G-d will not do anything for man with out the concurrence of that man.

If you consider the LDS concept that man is the offspring of G-d and that we are undergoing advanced training for define status some thing about life can make sense. For example, we are having a temporary experience. However: The experience is real (not pretend) the opportunities are real (not pretend). The consequences are real (not pretend).

As far as becoming enlightened – I have not found a better “path” to travel than what is offered in the LDS “faith”. If I could find something better; I would accept it in a heart beat.

If you have found better opportunity to participate in enlightening activities please point me. To be involved in community, serve in calling, experience love and compassion service. Consider the missionary program, you earn your own money and pay for your service. Welfare where all fast and offer what they save to the poor – and all regardless of what they have can participate with the same expectations and commitment to service – rich or poor. To take upon covenants – again all can help one another without attending special seminaries, or colleges to obtain degrees. One serving is not considered greater than another or deserving of greater reward. I could go on but I will ask you if you know of a better way to enlighten a society?

The Traveler
Reply With Quote