Per Webster's: Faith, "firm belief in something for which there is no proof".
Fact, "something that has actuall existence".
Do you prefer actuall reality, or percieved reality?
2006-09-10 04:52:49 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Perception is the process of acquiring, interpreting, selecting, and organizing sensory information. Our perceptions are our primary means to know anything. Our perceptions are not the things of course, so our perceptions can lead us astray. We are also guided by our deductions from perception. But religious beliefs rely primarily on uncritical acceptance of assertions for which no definitive proof can be offered, not on our perceptions. We do not see, touch, taste, smell or hear God, Angels, Devils, ghosts, holy or otherwise, etc.
Religious faith occurs as a rejection of our perceptions for rationales and revelations for which our perceptions can offer no proof. So I would say I prefer to live in a reality I can perceive, either directly or through verifiable instrumentation, to living based on mere assertions for which my perceptions can offer no confirmation. That is a positon I take whether or not the assertions are religious in nature.
2006-09-10 05:10:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I wonder if there is even a real, external world which can be known. You know, our senses often deceive us. You can be looking at an oar in the water and it will look crooked when it is partially submerged. A skeptic will carry this observation further and say that if we are sometimes deceived then we may always be deceived. The wise man should not trust his senses. Since the wise man knows that his senses are the source of his knowledge about the world, he must be skeptical about all things. I may perceive that the oar is bent, but I know that it isn't. Which do I prefer? The one I know is true - the actual. Think about the principle of causality. Simply because the sun always rises after the rooster crows does not mean it rises because the rooster crows.
2006-09-10 11:29:38 · answer #2 · answered by Phyllobates 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both
Sometimes the discovery of new facts can strengthen faith
I find the Webster definition of "fact" a bit presumptuous. Scientific facts may already exist in the world around us but we may not be aware of them for some time.
2006-09-10 05:40:17 · answer #3 · answered by druid_gtfx 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I assume you are talking about religion. Beliefs here are determined solely on faith for with all religion, although there are books written for them, there are no proofs of fact to base them on. It's like a chair, you see the chair, not knowing the construction, physics etc, you believe that it will hold you. This is faith based religion. Finally you sit down, this is when you meet your respective maker, after this life etc. and the chair holds you. The chair holding you is your proof that your belief had substance, it was true. We don't get that confirmation in this lifetime.
2006-09-10 05:00:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'll take fact every time. Faith is illogical by nature; logic says that nothing can be 100% proven, while faith is defined as being 100% certain of something (usually God). Anyone who actually has faith is irrational and needs to be educated.
2006-09-10 04:54:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I prefer to have fact for my basis of beliefs, I tried the faith thing and it just didn't cut it with me. I like the facts pure and simple so that no one misunderstands anyone else on any subject.
Actual Reality please.
2006-09-10 05:13:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Facts, facts, facts. We have everything but the facts. But we all have our beliefs. Texts are facts, too. Most people stick with that. But how to see through? Find more facts.
So ... so many new facts, these days, we're unearthing about the ancient. But, even scientists have their faiths to lead them astray. Stick to what you know, is what they do. But ... such partial knowledge.
They, too, claim more than they prove.
Who built the pyramids? Ha! A bunch of illiterate / inumerate neolithic peasants! Didn't even have the wheel, but could move 40-ton blocks of rock. Nah. I don't buy it.
Either all them old stories are wrong ... or they're all right ... or both.
2006-09-10 05:06:37 · answer #7 · answered by postquantum 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I prefer fact ...but as a mere human I have to have some faith in myself & others. I also have the need to believe in something greater than myself, there are things I can't begin to explain that have happened to me.
2006-09-10 05:00:17 · answer #8 · answered by Ivyvine 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
actually the bible defines faith as: faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see Heb. 11:1
Faith has an actual existence.
faith and fact carry the same heft and lift. therefore there is no preference for me.
2006-09-10 05:00:39 · answer #9 · answered by setfreejn836 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Religion substitutes 'faith' for fact, and 'belief' for knowledge... put the two together, and you end up with willfull ignorance and delusion.
2006-09-10 05:13:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋