What is Faith?

[Willamena]

And in reality they have believe in God without evidence.

To you.

In reality, god to them is real.

Yup, which is why we're not talking about pantheists, but theists.

Oh, my bad. I thought we were talking about people who believe in god.

 

[jarofthoughts]

To you.

In reality, god to them is real.

There is no such thing as personal realities.
It doesn't matter whether you believe in gravity or not, when you jump out of that ten storey window you will still bloody fall.

 

[Magic Man]

To you.

In reality, god to them is real.

Yup, but in reality God is not as real as a human being.

Oh, my bad. I thought we were talking about people who believe in god.

Yup, we are, but we're keeping it to one particular kind of god, so that the discussion is actually meaningful.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

There is no such thing as personal realities.
It doesn't matter whether you believe in gravity or not, when you jump out of that ten storey window you will still bloody fall.

If I change 'down' to be 'up', then I am actually rising. In that reality, we all 'fall' to the sky.

Do you really want to play this game? Personal realities are reality. If it were not true, there would be no reason to exist as individuals. Not only would there be no reason to do so, it would be impossible to do so.

People who inject entities into reality based on nothing but personal conviction are delusional, or worse, barking mad.

Far from it. They are simply being people.

 

[jarofthoughts]

If I change 'down' to be 'up', then I am actually rising. In that reality, we all 'fall' to the sky.

Here we go with the semantics game again. Mate, you cannot change the meaning of words just because it suits you. Crashing into the pavement after jumping from a ten storey window means that you hit the ground, not the sky, and the direction you are going is most definitely down, not up.
Now stop being a silly bugger and try to bring some arguments to the table that would somehow do better than baffle a retarded cockroach.
In case you missed it, I'm not impressed.

Do you really want to play this game? Personal realities are reality. If it were not true, there would be no reason to exist as individuals. Not only would there be no reason to do so, it would be impossible to do so.

Perception of reality is not the same as reality.
Next.

Far from it. They are simply being people.

And some of those people are barking mad.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Here we go with the semantics game again. Mate, you cannot change the meaning of words just because it suits you. Crashing into the pavement after jumping from a ten storey window means that you hit the ground, not the sky, and the direction you are going is most definitely down, not up.
Now stop being a silly bugger and try to bring some arguments to the table that would somehow do better than baffle a retarded cockroach.
In case you missed it, I'm not impressed.

From my perspective, you are in the wrong, not me. Just because a lot of other people agree with you doesn't mean you're right.

You are so entrenched in your subjective reality, that's all you see...so of course you think it is objective. That's all there is, so it must be.

Perception of reality is not the same as reality.
Next.

Of course it isn't. I never said it was. How we perceive reality is how we perceive it. Reality is reality. I merely said that how we perceive reality is all we have.

And some of those people are barking mad.

Most of us are, actually. It's called being human.

 

[jarofthoughts]

From my perspective, you are in the wrong, not me. Just because a lot of other people agree with you doesn't mean you're right.

You are so entrenched in your subjective reality, that's all you see...so of course you think it is objective. That's all there is, so it must be.

Of course, and you are so mysterious and wise, so mysterious in fact that common words have different meanings to you than they do to everyone else...
This isn't the kindergarten playground mate and you'll need more than semantic parlour tricks to impress me.

Of course it isn't. I never said it was. How we perceive reality is how we perceive it. Reality is reality. I merely said that how we perceive reality is all we have.

Really? You said:

Personal realities are reality

There is no such thing as "personal realities".
There is only one reality which, granted, can be perceived in different ways, but perception is not reality.

Most of us are, actually. It's called being human.

Some of us do well without delusional notions of entities that there is absolutely no reason to believe are real.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Of course, and you are so mysterious and wise, so mysterious in fact that common words have different meanings to you than they do to everyone else...
This isn't the kindergarten playground mate and you'll need more than semantic parlour tricks to impress me.

When you are working with someone who does not know the language, you must start at the beginning.

There is no such thing as "personal realities".
There is only one reality which, granted, can be perceived in different ways, but perception is not reality.

Reality is what is, would you not agree? What is is our perception of what is, is it not? Therefore, reality is our perception of it.

Some of us do well without delusional notions of entities that there is absolutely no reason to believe are real.

You perceive there is no reason to believe. So your reality is that there is no reason to believe. You've just proven my point.

 

[Willamena]

Yup, but in reality God is not as real as a human being.

To you.

Yup, we are, but we're keeping it to one particular kind of god, so that the discussion is actually meaningful.

You mean, then, so that the strawman is actually meaningful.

 

[Meow Mix]

Frankly, I can tell a lost cause to irrationality when I see one. I'm again going to have to just say "Good day to you" and bow out of this one. You can't reason with those who don't value reason.

 

[jarofthoughts]

When you are working with someone who does not know the language, you must start at the beginning.

Meh, I can't be arsed to teach you proper use of the English language.
You should have picked that up in elementary school.

Reality is what is, would you not agree?

Yup.

What is is our perception of what is, is it not? Therefore, reality is our perception of it.

Our perceptions can be, and often are, wrong.
Chanting the ol' "you have to believe first" line doesn't constitute an argument.
It constitutes intellectual bankruptcy.

You perceive there is no reason to believe. So your reality is that there is no reason to believe. You've just proven my point.

Wrong again.

Reality, and our investigation of it, has yielded no reason to believe, hence there is no reason to believe. When empirical evidence is presented that there is a god, I might change my position, but until then, you've got no game.

 

[Willamena]

Meh, I can't be arsed to teach you proper use of the English language.

Haha! Nice. Frubals.

 

[Magic Man]

To you.

Nope, remember we're talking about reality here. "To you" doesn't apply.

You mean, then, so that the strawman is actually meaningful.

Sorry, what? We're talking about people who believe in one particular god here. If you want to talk about people who believe in a different god, go ahead, but leave me out of it.

 

[Magic Man]

Frankly, I can tell a lost cause to irrationality when I see one. I'm again going to have to just say "Good day to you" and bow out of this one. You can't reason with those who don't value reason.

Yeah, I realized a long time ago I should bow out, but I guess I'm a glutton for punishment. Get out while you still can!

 

[Willamena]

Nope, remember we're talking about reality here. "To you" doesn't apply.

In reality, "to you" exists.

Sorry, what? We're talking about people who believe in one particular god here. If you want to talk about people who believe in a different god, go ahead, but leave me out of it.

Oh, I wasn't aware there was more than one. Monotheist here. Sorry.

 

[Magic Man]

In reality, "to you" exists.

Indeed it does. In reality, "flibbertygibbet" exists too. What's your point?

Oh, I wasn't aware there was more than one. Monotheist here. Sorry.

Yes, I understand you have some weird views that make communication pretty much impossible.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Indeed it does. In reality, "flibbertygibbet" exists too. What's your point?

That's the point exactly.

 

[Magic Man]

That's the point exactly.

And that point is?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Our perceptions can be, and often are, wrong.
Chanting the ol' "you have to believe first" line doesn't constitute an argument.
It constitutes intellectual bankruptcy.

Hardly. It teaches you what your perceptions are, so that you may in fact, determine which are constructive and which are not.

Reality, and our investigation of it, has yielded no reason to believe, hence there is no reason to believe. When empirical evidence is presented that there is a god, I might change my position, but until then, you've got no game.

And in you 'objective' opinion, empirical evidence is the only way to 'prove' god. I'd say that's the way you want god to be proven, not the only way to prove it. But of course, you'd have to prove that to yourself before you'll accept it.
It's all up to you, not to me. I have said something, and you can accept it or not. I'll try to get you to accept it, but as shown, it's not my decision. You have to choose to accept it.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

And that point is?

You can make the point whatever you want. Doesn't mean every viewpoint is right, or constructive. Just means there are as many viewpoints as there are people.