your belief requires faith, right?
2007-02-28 04:47:10 · 22 answers · asked by super Bobo 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
'It isn't just that I don't believe in God and, naturally, hope that I'm right in my belief. It's that I hope there is no God! I don't want there to be a God; I don't want the universe to be like that.
from Thomas Nagel's book "The Last Word" -
Does belief equal faith for Mr. Nagel? He says that he 'hopes he is right in his belief'. Isn't that faith? Of course it is, and from Mr. Nagel.
2007-02-28 07:55:37 · update #1
I addressed this question to any one atheist - didn't think you were all at the same computer terminal.
2007-02-28 07:57:28 · update #2
Faith is a belief in something that you do not fully understand. I do not fully understand gravity, but I have faith that I will remain firmly attached to the ground, because I know that there is such a thing as gravity, and I have been educated to understand that gravity is the law by which things remain attached to the ground.
Belief in God is not different, but at the same time, it is different. I do not fully understand what is God, but I have been told that God is the original cause of all that is. Of all wonderous questions we can ask, we are inevitably drawn to ask, "Where did it all come from"? The answer, to some, is God. Lacking understanding and a reasonable alternative, they accept on faith that God is the answer.
Others find fault with the answer of God, and choose instead to seek the answer in knowledge of science. They have concluded that, even if the answers are not fully understood, the scientific alternative is more sound, because it is based on reason, logic, and experimentation, not to mention verifiable evidence. It does require faith, but only a faith that eventually there will be undeniable proof of origins. For some, that proof exists already.
2007-02-28 05:09:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
This question implies that belief in God is the original state, which I disagree with. While I can see why some people would point to it as a natural conclusion, coming to this conclusion requires a weighing of the evidence before the decision is made. This evidence could be in the form of observed miracles, imprinting on children, a thought process, or whatever it takes for a certain individual to believe. Therefore, I think that lack of proof is a reason not to initiate belief more than a reason to suspend belief. Inconsistencies for example, whether biblical or philosophical, would be reason to suspend belief that previously existed.
2007-02-28 05:43:31 · answer #2 · answered by Phil 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lack of evidence is reason enough.
My belief that there is no god does not require any faith. I suspect that you do not understand what the word "faith" means, in light of your question.
2007-02-28 04:56:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is lack of proof or evidence that Unicorn, Genie (Jinn), Tooth fairy , Leprecon, Ghosts, Angels exist. You show me good evidence, I will believe them. For me to believe in them requires scientific evidence, not faith. Religion is based on faith where as Science is based on proof. This is a good question though.
2007-02-28 05:26:02 · answer #4 · answered by Saphire4 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. A lack of a reason to believe something is a good reason to lack belief in something.
No, that is not faith. Faith is believing something when you have a lack of reason to believe it.
However, my atheism is not just because of a lack of evidence (proof is only for mathematicians and distillers). There is a lot of evidence that shows gods to be man-made. There is also a lot of evidence that humans make up stuff that isn't true, based on what they want to believe is true.
On the other hand, there is no real evidence that shows the existence of any gods.
So, atheism is based on evidence..
2007-02-28 04:51:53 · answer #5 · answered by nondescript 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Lepricaunism (belief in lepricauns)
I assume you're an Alepricaunist, right?
is lack of proof reason enough to suspend belief?
your belief requires faith, right?
2007-02-28 05:02:48 · answer #6 · answered by TLG 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hmmmmm. nicely, God did no longer create the universe. Physics did that. He did no longer create the variety of existence. Evolution did that. He would not answer prayers, psychology has shown that. So no longer possibly many places left for him to conceal. So, sure, i'm chuffed my theory that I lack theory is authentic. (((Olga))) EDIT: Presuppositions? i'm extremely joyful you're taking them as such yet I do discover it somewhat magnificent!!!
2016-10-02 02:58:45 · answer #7 · answered by borgmeyer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. I dont "beleive" in anything in the same way that faith is defined...
Yes, lack of proof is a great reason to suspend belief. Dont bother mentioning Evolution - it is backed up with plenty of evidence.
2007-02-28 04:50:55 · answer #8 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Learn basic philosophy before you spout your crap. It's correct to disbelieve in any proposition unsupported by valid eveidence- faith doesn't enter into it, and the rules of philosophy don't change just because Christians don't like the conclusions they lead to.
2007-02-28 05:01:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, gods are logically impossible. There are only two possible origins for an intelligent entity - either an unthinking natural process (evolution) or creation by an antecedent intelligence, and since a creator deity would (by definition) have neither of these origins, such a thing cannot possibly exist. No faith required.
2007-02-28 04:49:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 3⤋