Do You Believe In God?

[gnmmarechal]

So if I believe gravity doesn't exist, does it not exist?

I dunno, my feet seem pretty planted on the ground here.

That's because you believe in gravity. Those who don't flew from the Earth, u skrub /s

 

[Lacius]

I'm citing sources of people who write world wide college level class curriculums and you're just telling me they're wrong without giving any sources.

As I've already mentioned, there's difference between the colloquial definition of knowledge and the epistemological definition of knowledge. There's also a difference between the colloquial definition of faith and the epistemological definition of faith.

You have not cited sources; you've given me a link to a Wikipedia article that also doesn't tell me which definitions of these words your sources are using, so we cannot even assess your source for whether or not it contradicts anything said in this thread.

Edit: Here's the first Google result I just found. I don't know why I had to do it for you: http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_epistemology.html

Knowledge is the awareness and understanding of particular aspects of reality. It is the clear, lucid information gained through the process of reason applied to reality. The traditional approach is that knowledge requires three necessary and sufficient conditions, so that knowledge can then be defined as "justified true belief."

 

[bi388]

As I've already mentioned, there's difference between the colloquial definition of knowledge and the epistemological definition of knowledge. There's also a difference between the colloquial definition of faith and the epistemological definition of faith.

You have not cited sources; you've given me a link to a Wikipedia article that also doesn't tell me which definitions of these words your sources are using, so we cannot even assess your source for whether or not it contradicts anything said in this thread.

Edit: Here's the first Google result I just found. I don't know why I had to do it for you: http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_epistemology.html

Do you know that World War 1 happened?

 

[chaoskagami]

Do you know that World War 1 happened?

Unrelated to the topic at hand. Red herring.

 

[bi388]

Unrelated to the topic at hand. Red herring.

Lol no. This is very related. You weren't there for ww1. If you believe in it you are using faith (in addition to logic)

 

[Lacius]

Do you know that World War 1 happened?

Lol no. This is very related. You weren't there for ww1. If you believe in it you are using faith (in addition to logic)

I do believe and know that World War I happened. It's justified true belief through reason and evidence, which means it's not faith as defined as belief without sound reason and evidence. Faith is the excuse people give when they have no reason to believe something. I do not need to have witnessed something to have justification for a belief. For example, it takes longer for Pluto to orbit the sun than we've known about its existence, but that doesn't mean I can't know how long it takes for Pluto to orbit the sun. I have reason and evidence.

Also, don't follow-up by conflating knowledge or maximal knowledge with absolute knowledge. I predict that's coming.

 

[chaoskagami]

Lol no. This is very related. You weren't there for ww1. If you believe in it you are using faith (in addition to logic)

Uh...no.

@Lacius, help.

EDIT: Ninja'd. Thank god (or not, heh) for the voice of reason here.

 

[bi388]

I do believe and know that World War I happened. It's justified true belief through reason and evidence, which means it's not faith as defined as belief without sound reason and evidence. Faith is the excuse people give when they have no reason to believe something. I do not need to have witnessed something to have justification for a belief. For example, it takes longer for Pluto to orbit the sun than we've known about its existence, but that doesn't mean I can't know how long it takes for Pluto to orbit the sun. I have reason and evidence.

Also, don't follow-up by conflating knowledge or maximal knowledge with absolute knowledge. I predict that's coming.

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
I don't know where you're getting the "without reason" thing

 

[chaoskagami]

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
I don't know where you're getting the "without reason" thing

"without needing justification even if contrary to evidence"

Specifically, since the definition does NOT mention evidence, faith does not require it. Facts do. And without evidence, faith != fact

 

[bi388]

"without needing justification even if contrary to evidence"

Yes without needing to. Which is different from saying that it needs to not have evidence to qualify. I think that a world wide major teaching organization probably knows more on this than the average member of a hacking website so I'll let that speak for itself.

 

[Lacius]

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
I don't know where you're getting the "without reason" thing

See my many previous posts where I contrasted the colloquial definition of faith with the epistemological and religious definitions of faith. I also defined faith numerous times in direct response to your posts.

When I talk about faith, I am talking about it when it's used solely as a person's justification for religious belief (i.e. "I believe in God because of faith"). To use the colloquial definition of confidence or trust is irrelevant to the conversation. I've outlined numerous times why.

 

[mashers]

"I don't know if a god exists" does not answer the question "Do you believe a god exists?"

Well that's exactly the point of agnosticism. You can't force someone to make a yes/no decision about something they don't feel able to answer by assuming that "I don't know" means 'no'. I understand that you're saying "I don't know whether god exists" is similar in meaning to "I do not have a belief that god does exist". However, to take the latter as equal to an atheist's definite belief that there is no god is missing a crucial part of the agnostic viewpoint:

Atheist: "I actively believe that there is no god. There is no alternative to this."
Agnostic: "I do not have a belief one way or another about whether or not there is a god. There either may be a god, or may not be a god, but I do not have sufficient evidence to decide either way."

 

[bi388]

See my many previous posts where I contrasted the colloquial definition of faith with the epistemological and religious definitions of faith. I also defined faith numerous times in direct response to your posts.

When I talk about faith, I am talking about it when it's used solely as a person's justification for religious belief (i.e. "I believe in God because of faith"). To use the colloquial definition of confidence or trust is irrelevant to the conversation. I've outlined numerous times why.

Maybe if youre using a different definition you should have started an argument with me when what I said is correct using my definition?

 

[Lacius]

Well that's exactly the point of agnosticism. You can't force someone to make a yes/no decision about something they don't feel able to answer by assuming that "I don't know" means 'no'. I understand that you're saying "I don't know whether god exists" is similar in meaning to "I do not have a belief that god does exist". However, to take the latter as equal to an atheist's definite belief that there is no god is missing a crucial part of the agnostic viewpoint:

Atheist: "I actively believe that there is no god. There is no alternative to this."
Agnostic: "I do not have a belief one way or another about whether or not there is a god. There either may be a god, or may not be a god, but I do not have sufficient evidence to decide either way."

Good, we've found the problem. That is not the definition of atheism. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not necessarily the active belief that there is no god.

Maybe if youre using a different definition you should have started an argument with me when what I said is correct using my definition?

You're not reading my posts, because I acknowledged almost immediately that the use of the word faith using the definition confidence or trust does not necessarily mean without reason/evidence, and I explained that it's the epistemological and religious definition of faith that isn't a source of knowledge.

 

[gnmmarechal]

Good, we've found the problem. That is not the definition of atheism. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not necessarily the active belief that there is no god.

What if I believe I lack lacking the belief in addition to that?

*mind blown*

 

[mashers]

Good, we've found the problem. That is not the definition of atheism. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not necessarily the active belief that there is no god.

No, atheism is disbelief in the existence of god. Disbelief is not the same as lack of belief.

 

[Lacius]

What if I believe I lack lacking the belief in addition to that?

If you lack lacking the belief, then you believe, by definition. That's why it's a dichotomy.

 

[TheGreek Boy]

OF COURSE I BELIEVE IN GOD!

 

[Lacius]

No, atheism is disbelief in the existence of god. Disbelief is not the same as lack of belief.

That's exactly what disbelief means, actually.

 

[gnmmarechal]

Hum, as per this dictionary:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
As per Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

If you lack lacking the belief, then you believe, by definition. That's why it's a dichotomy.

yet, I don't believe either. I'm contradicting myself again, am I not?







x.x


If I lack lacking the belief, and I also lack the belief, what the hell do I believe in x.x