A question for those with 'faith.'

[dust1n]

A simple question. Feel free to explain your position.


Essentially, I would like to ask:

What are you more sure of, your faith, or that 1+1=2, (EDIT: using base 10. For post 6, Thanks BSM1.)

I ask because of an interesting idea I heard in a discussion about Descartes. If you remove all of your presuppositions about knowledge and the world, faith would seem to naturally be the position in which one can must be sure of.

Let's hear it!

 

[Shuddhasattva]

My faith.

Why?

"Define 1."

 

[Reverend Richard]

A simple question. Feel free to explain your position.


Essentially, I would like to ask:

What are you more sure of, your faith, or that 1+1=2?

I ask because of an interesting idea I heard in a discussion about Descartes. If you remove all of your presuppositions about knowledge and the world, faith would seem to naturally be the position in which one can must be sure of.

Let's hear it!

It's not an either/or question.

I have faith that 1+1=2, because it always has in the past. However, someone much smarter than I may come along and prove that the equation is wrong. (I may not understand why it's wrong, but there's an awful lot of math I don't understand.)

 

[dust1n]

My faith.

Why?

"Define 1."

Why?.

I ask because of an interesting idea I heard in a discussion about Descartes. If you remove all of your presuppositions about knowledge and the world, faith would seem to naturally be the position in which one can must be sure of.

 

[dust1n]

It's not an either/or question.

I have faith that 1+1=2, because it always has in the past. However, someone much smarter than I may come along and prove that the equation is wrong. (I may not understand why it's wrong, but there's an awful lot of math I don't understand.)

Oh, I guess I should have put an 'equally the same' option, then.

 

[BSM1]

faith, not proof needed

you would have us assume the equation is base 10

 

[Reverend Richard]

faith, not proof needed

you would have us assume the equation is base 10

even in binary, 1 + 1 = 10 (which is still 2)...

 

[Son of Logic]

Faith is a substitution for rational foundation. When there is no evidence to support a particular belief, a void exists. To fill that void and attribute what one wishes to believe as "true", faith become the necessary filler. Faith requires nothing more than an assumption and/or assertion is true. You could even say that faith is the "hope" that something is true, falling into the category of wishful thinking in such instances.

One may have faith that they will live a long life. However, there are far too many variables for this faith to ever have grounding in anything close to certainty. In the end, no matter how much one tries to affect it to fit there faith based belief, the longevity of their life has nothing to do with hope, faith, or wishful thinking and everything to do with a multitude of variables based purely in reality. Some can be controlled, others cannot, but "faith" holds no truth in the equation.

 

[dust1n]

faith, not proof needed

you would have us assume the equation is base 10

Good point, let me fix that.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I have faith that 1 + 1 = 2 with the understanding that it is rather subjective. One apple plus one apple equal 2 apples but alter the context but a little and the answer can be different. 1 real apple + 1 apple picture = 1 apple. Context and perception is important in math just as it is in religion. Is a chair solid? No, but it appears to be so.

 

[dust1n]

even in binary, 1 + 1 = 10 (which is still 2)...

Yea, I thought so, but I qualified farther to avoid the issue hereafter.

 

[BSM1]

even in binary, 1 + 1 = 10 (which is still 2)...

only in spirit

 

[dust1n]

I have faith that 1 + 1 = 2 with the understanding that it is rather subjective. One apple plus one apple equal 2 apples but alter the context but a little and the answer can be different. 1 real apple + 1 apple picture = 1 apple. Context and perception is important in math just as it is in religion. Is a chair solid? No, but it appears to be so.

Assume both 1's are referring to the same unit. It's a purely mathematical concept, no need to qualify with what object we are counting here.

 

[dust1n]

only in spirit

Is it?

I would assume that

1 + 1 = 2 (base ten) = 10 (base two) =, etc. infinite number of bases...

10 (base two) is 2 (base ten), no?

 

[idav]

Is this a question of logic or faith? Like 1 + a = b and having faith that b=4 therfore being able to assume a=3?

 

[sandandfoam]

Everything I know either changes or can potentially change.
When I walk outside and breathe the air, that feels real. I'm equally (un)sure of faith and math - but I work harder at faith.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Assume both 1's are referring to the same unit. It's a purely mathematical concept, no need to qualify with what object we are counting here.

But there is. You are comparing an intensely complex concept (faith) with a simplistic mathematical equation. It is only fair to point out that the equation is only simple in some perceptions. Unless you can make the faith concept simple you need to consider a more complex equation in relation to it.

 

[Storm]

A simple question. Feel free to explain your position.


Essentially, I would like to ask:

What are you more sure of, your faith, or that 1+1=2, (EDIT: using base 10. For post 6, Thanks BSM1.)

I ask because of an interesting idea I heard in a discussion about Descartes. If you remove all of your presuppositions about knowledge and the world, faith would seem to naturally be the position in which one can must be sure of.

Let's hear it!

What are you getting at?

 

[Son of Logic]

Assume both 1's are referring to the same unit. It's a purely mathematical concept, no need to qualify with what object we are counting here.

I have never been a fan of proposing such questions as your OP offered, in regards to believers. The question itself is flawed. It's a nonsensical query. They don't need to have "faith" that 1+1=2 in any sense of "suspending logic or rationale" in which to reach their conclusion. We have a universally cohesive set of foundational mathematical rules in which we agree that 1+1=2 in a simple, predefined mathematical context. Therefore, a logical and reasoned assumption can be attributed to the equation without deferring to "faith" that the assumption is absolute in an objective sense.

 

[Reverend Richard]

only in spirit

..... :162: