believing something without any evidence is faith. believing something in spite of evidence is dillusional?

Question

this is just a thought of mine. wondering how you guys feel about it.

Answer 1

Darwin requires FAITH! TRUE Christianity simply requires some experience in it!

Answer 2

Yeah, I agree. It's like how can people believe that the millions of life forms on this planet "evolved" from one celled creatures when there is the evidence given to us by scientists that DNA is a complex code that contains highly specified information and we know that information comes from intelligence not random acts.

I mean, if you don't want to believe in the God of the Bible, that's your choice. But to believe that an amoeba turned into a giraffe and a hummingbird and an elephant and a bumblebee and a duck billed platypus all because of random mutations that somehow imparted beneficial structures to the DNA sequence is totally ludicrous.

It's like claiming that the latest 3-D video games "evolved" from the 1980 Atari games because over time radiation changed the code and it all just happened to work out perfectly. Only that's a lot more likely than to claim that the intricate ecological system we have where plants and insects and every other creature that impacts the propagation of other creatures all just magically came about at just the right time and not just once, but millions of times over in a system so intricate that even today we still can't figure out all of the parameters that make it work.

Answer 3

Actually, I have always considered believing in something without evidence as BLIND faith. There is a big difference in my mind between faith and blind faith. I have faith that if I jump up, I will fall back down. I have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow. That is not to say that the things you have faith in are a certainty. Actions can occur to prevent the things you have faith in from happening. (For my example the earth could be thrown out of orbit by a HUGE meteor or alien attack and viola, no more gravity no more sun rising in the morning…but that is VERY unlikely.)

I do tend to feel that believing in something despite evidence is delusional. However, there is a catch to that. I believe in love. It's not something physical, but I have felt it, I have witnessed it's actions and there is quite a bit of corroborating evidence to support that particular state of affection.

However, a belief in a supernatural being, for me, would be delusional because I have never felt any kind of divine spirit and the "evidence" that has been presented has not held any water without having to have BLIND faith being added to the mix.

So, yeah, I'd have to say believing in something in spite of evidence IS delusional. But that's just my humble opinion.

Answer 4

This is from a song, with my mind shot as it is, I don't remember the name, but anyway "Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see." As it has been stated by many, science constantly finds what they thought to be "true", "false" The Sun and planets revolving around the Earth, the Earth being flat, the sun being a god etc etc "It", as Somerset Maugham said, "doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter." The Final Frontier"

Peace and love

Answer 5

Yes , an example is the delusional belief in creationism when the evidence for evolution is so solid as to be definite ... evolution is how life developed on our planet

Answer 6

believing something w/o any evidence is faith. believing something in spite of evidence, is either greater faith or stubbornness.

Answer 7

I have evidence that man commits evil. Is believing that man is inherently good therefore delusional?

Blanket statements are always doomed to failure.

Answer 8

Both require faith. You have to have faith in anything you believe in, otherwise you don't believe in it.

Answer 9

Believing in God is the wisest decision you'll ever make.
(And yes to the first statement)

Answer 10

I agree, those who deny the facts do not want to know.