What is Faith?

[F1fan]

How do you see Baha'is hijacking threads?

Threads started about general religious concepts, like this one about Faith, ends up being about the specific beliefs of certain Baha'i. Baha'i can be used as an example, but it becomes the focus too often. Both basic definitions of the word faith has been well defined, and it is well established that reliogious faith is an unjustified reason to believe in ideas that can't be reasoned via evidence. You have your own definitions and beliefs, and your own beliefs about your abilities, that are not shared by critical thinkers. This tends to become a merry-go-round where no one gets anywhere.

What I see is certain atheists hijacking my threads.

That's why there are forums for believers only. These general discussions are open to all members. And atheists tend to be able to show their work in these debates, and I'd say have the advantage in any discussion about regious belief.

 

[wandering peacefully]

In case you haven't noticed, I never put any pressure on atheists to believe in God.

But what about pressure applied to Christians, all 4,900 sects, Buddhist, The Jewish religion, Hindus, Wiccan, Spiritualism. Satanism, etc?

It seems the Bahai in general are extremely concerned with convincing, demeaning, appropriating, all other religions and exclaiming exclusivity of the True Knowledge for all time up to this day and age, when it comes to all things God(s) and "messengers/prophets?

So no, no atheist has any chance of becoming a bahai and certainly do not feel any pressure, but what about the pressure of trying to put doubt in the minds and religious faith of other believers?

Do you think that is really what your God would want?

 

[F1fan]

Well, if we assume that for a more general category all theists are objectivist for what the world really is, that could apply to other objectivists.

A person can acheive any truth they like with the right set of assumptions. That is something to be wary of doing.

In short I get you don't like that I do critical thinking as per strong skepticism and I get it is not useful for you. But that has nothing to do with evidence, reason and valid as such.

It's nothing to do with like or dislike. Utility is an advantage when a person considers an epistemology. I suggest even those who prefer, and claim, other approaches will secretely use a more utilitarian version. Whether the secret includes the self is a question that can be asked.

 

[F1fan]

When you realise that nothing, absolutely nothing in this world, is quite what it appears to be;

Give examples. I don't get rude awakenings to a degree you suggest here.

When you begin to recognise that there is no fixed point anywhere in this ephemeral universe, to which you may anchor your certainties;

Except we humans can be certain about many things that are demonstrable. If you mix chloride and sodium, two poisons, it makes harmless table salt. Always. No surprizes.

If you mean something else, like about personal meaning, then you need to be less vague.

When it dawns on you that all you see around you is but a flickering kaleidoscope of mirage and metaphor;

This sounds like you are describing your life.

Then you may, without fear, relinquish the anguished grip with which you cling to the world;

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Are you having problems and trying to project it to the whole world?

Lighten your touch, learn to let go and let it all be;
And you may begin to understand how a change in perceptions can “render lighter, the bittersweet flowing of our lives”.

This is debate. I'm pretty light as it goes. Theists have a disadvantage in debate due to their frameworks of belief not being factually based. So criticism can feel hard.

BTW, I asked you this:

Equally valid and practical? Such as what? How are alternatives of a utilitarian approach serving others since an alternative would NOT be utility?​

and you offered no direct reply. I was curious for a direct answer and was disappointed with whatever you posted that was irrelevant.

 

[blü 2]

No, God does not exist in the text, nor in the brain of the person reading the text.
If God exists, God exists somewhere far beyond our reach.

That's a well-placed "if"! And I'd say "somewhere far beyond our reach" is an idea, not a place.

 

[blü 2]

Care is to genuinely, actively regard and will someone or something's well being. Care is a desire and an intention that results in that emotion from the brain. It's formed by relationship and understanding. The emotions that care generates can be many different kinds. Emotions do make sense like a language; the experience of joy, or concern, or even worry triggers different kinds of emotions regarding care.

I think it a mistake to define the chemistry as literally being the care. The emotions are telling but not the whole story. Emotions are responses to the care.

Thanks for your input!

My pleasure.

Go well.

 

[F1fan]

Care manifests in feelings and actions, but those are effects not causes.

This makes no sense. So you are claiming that feelings come first, and then care is suddenly manifested, like magic? And actions begin and only then care is manifested? Then what originates the feeling and actions if care isn't present as a quality?

You can't reduce the explanation of care to physical descriptives; there are abstract substantive descriptives regarding care. Certainly I get feelings when I care, and those feelings are merely responses. Where care originates is not as simple as feelings and actions.

Empathy and compassion are evolved traits in most humans. About 1 in 24 people are born sociopaths, which means they are incapable of empathy. Others learn to be callous due to negative social environments.

But we are getting out into the weeds on this topic.

 

[osgart]

This makes no sense. So you are claiming that feelings come first, and then care is suddenly manifested, like magic? And actions begin and only then care is manifested? Then what originates the feeling and actions if care isn't present as a quality?

Empathy and compassion are evolved traits in most humans. About 1 in 24 people are born sociopaths, which means they are incapable of empathy. Others learn to be callous due to negative social environments.

But we are getting out into the weeds on this topic.

The quality of care comes first. Feelings follow from that.

 

[F1fan]

The brain to me is electrochemical reactions that are intimately associated with the mind. Electricity and chemicals do not explain the mind.

So I see a gap in possible explanation. The gap is from the physical to the abstract. I mean how does electrochemical reactions explain qualities of mind.

The word "mind" means a collection of functions living brains do. Mind IS the functions of the brain, so I don't see how you can be so confused about this. Dead brains, no mind. Brain dead, no mind.

I suppose there'd be a Nobel prize for anyone who can bridge the gap.

It's mind numbingly stated that the brain states, feelings, and actions represent what goes on in the mind fully, by way of electrochemical reactions. It's claimed so much, and said to be observed, but abstracts cannot be observed.

Has anyone ever witnessed a thought as a mental object?

Yes, in fMRI scans and pet scans brains producing thoughts can be witnessed. And EEG scans can record brain activity including thoughts.

It's pure genius, or a fools' errand to be able to model this in a purely scientific way.

Ironic you say "fool's errand" given your posts that indicate you never did homework before writing.

 

[F1fan]

The quality of care comes first. Feelings follow from that.

Changing your claim from this "Care manifests in feelings and actions, but those are effects not causes." Manifests suggest an effect, and causes come first which you suggest is feelings and actions.

 

[Truthseeker]

But what about pressure applied to Christians, all 4,900 sects, Buddhist, The Jewish religion, Hindus, Wiccan, Spiritualism. Satanism, etc?

What pressure? Can you show me where that is? We share our beliefs but don't put pressure on them, as far as I know. I can't keep tabs on all Baha'is, though. There could well be instances where that happened. We are not encouraged to do so.

Consort with all men, O people of Baha, in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship. If ye be aware of a certain truth, if ye possess a jewel, of which others are deprived, share it with them in a language of utmost kindliness and good-will. If it be accepted, if it fulfil its purpose, your object is attained. If any one should refuse it, leave him unto himself, and beseech God to guide him. Beware lest ye deal unkindly with him. A kindly tongue is the lodestone of the hearts of men. It is the bread of the spirit, it clotheth the words with meaning, it is the fountain of the light of wisdom and understanding....
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 288)

It seems the Bahai in general are extremely concerned with convincing, demeaning, appropriating, all other religions and exclaiming exclusivity of the True Knowledge for all time up to this day and age, when it comes to all things God(s) and "messengers/prophets?

The above quote says we should "share it with them in a language of utmost kindliness and good-will", not strive to convince. The above quote also says we should not demean but rather "Consort with all men, O people of Baha, in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." That includes people who are religious too, logically. The only appropriation we have concerning other religions is that we have the same spiritual principles.

To them will the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar symbolize the fundamental verity underlying the Bahá'í Faith, that religious truth is not absolute but relative, that Divine Revelation is not final but progressive.
(Shoghi Effendi, Extracts from the USBN)

Our truths are not final and exhaustive.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I like this definition:

"1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
- Hebrews 11:1

 

[Trailblazer]

That's a well-placed "if"! And I'd say "somewhere far beyond our reach" is an idea, not a place.

I'd say it is not a place but rather another dimension far beyond our reach.

 

[Trailblazer]

I like this definition:

"1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
- Hebrews 11:1

*WINNER*

 

[Trailblazer]

But what about pressure applied to Christians, all 4,900 sects, Buddhist, The Jewish religion, Hindus, Wiccan, Spiritualism. Satanism, etc?

It seems the Bahai in general are extremely concerned with convincing, demeaning, appropriating, all other religions and exclaiming exclusivity of the True Knowledge for all time up to this day and age, when it comes to all things God(s) and "messengers/prophets?

I cannot improve upon the answer that @Truthseeker posted to you, I can only add a little.

I have not seen any Baha'is convincing, demeaning, or appropriating all other religions. Baha'is do not claiming exclusive access to God, although there are other religions that do that. We believe people can come to God through any true religion.

Baha'is are not claiming to have the True Knowledge for all time when it comes to all things God(s) and "messengers/prophets.
We only believe what Baha'u'llah claimed, that Baha'u'llah is the Messenger from God for this age, until another Messenger appears. There will be Messengers sent by God in the future, as long as humans exist on earth.

So no, no atheist has any chance of becoming a bahai and certainly do not feel any pressure, but what about the pressure of trying to put doubt in the minds and religious faith of other believers?

Do you think that is really what your God would want?

Baha'is are not trying to put doubt into the minds of other religious believers, we are only sharing our message of Baha'u'llah, as we have been instructed to do. If people doubt their own religions beliefs as a result that is not our responsibility. Everyone has free will to choose what to believe.

I have no idea what God wants unless it is revealed in scripture but I see that @Truthseeker already posted that to you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Threads started about general religious concepts, like this one about Faith, ends up being about the specific beliefs of certain Baha'i. Baha'i can be used as an example, but it becomes the focus too often.

If that happens it is because no other religious believers show up. The thread is open to anyone who wants to contribute.

Both basic definitions of the word faith has been well defined, and it is well established that religious faith is an unjustified reason to believe in ideas that can't be reasoned via evidence.

No, that has not been established, it is only your personal opinion and the personal opinion of one other person.

You have your own definitions and beliefs, and your own beliefs about your abilities, that are not shared by critical thinkers. This tends to become a merry-go-round where no one gets anywhere.

That's true, and it never will get anywhere, so why hop on the merry-go-round?

That's why there are forums for believers only. These general discussions are open to all members. And atheists tend to be able to show their work in these debates, and I'd say have the advantage in any discussion about regious belief.

I'd say that the religious believers have the advantage, but that is only my personal opinion, which is also what you have.

 

[osgart]

Changing your claim from this "Care manifests in feelings and actions, but those are effects not causes." Manifests suggest an effect, and causes come first which you suggest is feelings and actions.

No, I made no such claim change. The quality manifests in feelings and actions. The quality always came first.

 

[osgart]

The word "mind" means a collection of functions living brains do. Mind IS the functions of the brain, so I don't see how you can be so confused about this. Dead brains, no mind. Brain dead, no mind.

Yes, in fMRI scans and pet scans brains producing thoughts can be witnessed. And EEG scans can record brain activity including thoughts.

Ironic you say "fool's errand" given your posts that indicate you never did homework before writing.

That's fascinating that they found a direct correspondence between thoughts and the brain.
Thoughts then manifest in the brain. Ok?

 

[blü 2]

I'd say it is not a place but rather another dimension far beyond our reach.

If only there were any evidence for that ... however sleight. Ah, if only ...

 

[Aupmanyav]

So no, no atheist has any chance of becoming a bahai and certainly do not feel any pressure, but what about the pressure of trying to put doubt in the minds and religious faith of other believers?
Do you think that is really what your God would want?

Not just Bahais but Christians and Islam too. It is mandatory to spread the good news (Dawah). "Get your nose cut and see the Emperors new clothes". As for their Gods prophets and theory, one has to take it on their word, no other evidence.