I promised another reply to a comment on faith. Commenter Stever writes:
I also see you have faith as well, even though you do not consider it a virtue. Your faith is in the natural world. That is the engine of creation, the influencer of the world in which you live. You trust and understand (even if it is a limited understanding) “it” as the thing that makes the world go ’round. It is the thing that goes around. We all have faith in things, like political parties, financial institutions, money as the source of happiness, etcFaith as a virtue is the understanding that all our life, everything, derives meaning and understanding out of our relationship with Jesus. Humility may look the same for you and me, but your interpretation of it excludes my undeerstanding of a personal God. For you faith isn’t a virtue and I wouldn’t expect you to understand it because you don’t subscribe to my world view. My faith is a response to what God has done for me, for humanity, and it drives me to invest more into people and my society. It is what also helps me to cling to the truth of Jesus, even when others would hurt or kill me for doing so. People have been martyred for both our countries, for freedom (aside from all the religious stuff). The soldiers belief is that there is a greater cause, a cause that hits at the heart of humanity. Sure, some do it for the money, others because they are ordered to (and in the army you need to obey orders), and a variety of other reasons. But one of the things that makes a sacrifial death meaningful is the faith that it is for a greater cause. There’s something virtuous in that.
In the first paragraph, we again see faith defined in other ways. Belief and faith are not the same thing, and trust and faith are not the same thing. You can believe something because reason and evidence suggests it. That is not faith. I do not have faith in the natural world. I have evidence for various causes in the natural world, causes that affect me. I most definitely do not trust in the natural world–the point of my post was that the natural world does not care about me at all, and I cannot trust it. it could kill me tomorrow. I do trust some of the people around me, and sometimes we say that we have faith in them. But that is a different use of the word faith, to mean trust. Trust is based on evidence–I have interacted with this person in the past and they have been reliable, and so I trust them in the future. If the person would betray my trust, I have new evidence and I will no longer trust them.
Likewise I do not have faith in money as the source of happiness–if someone does or not believe that, it is based on their experiences. Sometimes it is how they see other wealthy people and it might be incomplete evidence because they do not see if the wealthy are truly happy, but they still believe money will give them happiness based on evidence. I do not have faith in political parties. I choose one based on what reason tells me will help the country. I might have to trust politicians or financial institutions, but that again is not faith, it is trust. If a bank goes under on me, I probably will not trust them in the future. Again, by faith I mean only belief without evidence.
The last paragraph discusses how faith motivates some people. Yes, it does. People without faith are also motivated for causes bigger than themselves, however. Contrary to the saying, there are many atheists in foxholes. There are atheists that defend their country and other ideals, not believing they will be rewarded in an afterlife. They believe in a greater cause, but again, not on faith. They use reason to decide if the cause of a war is just and worthy.
I do not doubt that faith has motivated good works, and in that way it would be virtuous. However, the same works can be motivated in other ways. The problem is that with faith, there is no way to distinguish between truly worthy causes and faulty ones. Both sides of a religious war firmly believe, based on faith, that God is on their side. Terrorists believe God is on their side. The reason I do not see faith as virtuous as a motivator is because it is an indiscriminate motivator. By definition it is belief without evidence. That means people are just as likely to be motivated for bad things as for good. Faith has no means to distinguish true from false, good causes from bad. The behaviors Steve discusses are good. The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is that the reason to do those behaviors are based on faith rather than reason, and the same justification can be used for evil. How do you argue against someone that hurts others, and say they do it because of their faith?
Advertisement
Tags: faith
December 18, 2008 at 7:37 pm |
“The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is that the reason to do those behaviors are based on faith rather than reason, and the same justification can be used for evil. How do you argue against someone that hurts others, and say they do it because of their faith?”
People have done good and bad in the name of reason. That does make reason a questionable thing, but opens up the discussion on “What is faulty reasoning?” There is faulty faith too, faith based on wrong premises or objects. And reason is also a choice. Smoking causes cancer. A reasonable person would accept that fact. Why are there still so many smokers?
We come to all of life with filters. When I use the word faith in a personal sense, it comes with baggage. The baggage is not necessarily good or bad, but dependent again upon our view of ethics and morality; other words which also come predisposed of a world view.
My faith is connected to the unseen, but verified in many ways for me. In my lief my experiences include answered prayer, physical healing, an inner “assurance”, etc, all things that no one else can tap into because they are my experiences. They may not be “adequate” for you, but for me they are, for my faith is more than rules, it is a relationship. The Bible is really about who God is, His character, and who we are, and how we can relate to God. That is relationship. Within my worldview is the sense of the value of all people, regardless of class, colour of skin, etc. This is not a universal belief, but it is foundational to mine.
November 17, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
You have a world view. You have an understanding of why humans are the way they are. You have can explain why they are violent at times, and where the softer moments come from. You understand motivations and the consequences of actions. That could be called your “faith” and that is not a wrong way to use the word. That view is based on what? It is based on your experiences (which includes the teachings of people around you and those gone before you in books, etc). It is based on your reason, how you have taken those experiences in context (more or less) and come to conclusions as a result. History should help provide some context and support for or against your conclusions. You don’t blindly believe stuff. You use your brain.
At the heart of my world view is the belief that there is value in every human life. This stems from the fact that I believe we were created by a personal God. Because I believe in the value of life, it informs and directs my understandings and beliefs about things like abortion (at what point does the fetus become a life?) and euthanasia and war/pacifism. What you are asking about is integrity. Am I living my life in ways that support what I say I believe or not? Anybody can say one thing but in practice do the opposite. Why do we do that? Is that because we purposely try to deceive? Sometimes. Is it because we are unable to live up to our expectations of ourself? Sometimes (Romans 7 anyone?). That’s why faith is more than just a belief. If you don’t include those motivations (for personal gain, for control, for pleasure) then you don’t have integrity. Actions prove the belief.