Academic Fables and Myths: Does Believing Make It So?

BreakPoint with Charles Colson ^ | August 13, 2004 | Mark Earley

[Mr. Silverback]

"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools..."--Romans 1:21,22

[stuartcr]

If the rules of logic and evidence really applied to this subject, then there would be a lot more people that agreed and believed in the same thing.

[BikerNYC]

This is such an obvious fallacy. Can we really make something true just by believing it? How about a concrete example?

Okay. Is vanilla the absolutely best ice cream flavor in the world just because I believe it is?

Yes.

[Mr. Silverback]

BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[jdege]

If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?

[outlawcam]

Your fallacy is that you're assuming people respond equally to reason and logic. They do not.

[horatio]

The other fallacy is to apply reason and logic to faith.

Faith is a beautiful thing, and it exists completely outside reason. To try to "prove" faith through conventional methods is a fool's errand.

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[theDentist]

"...in this post-Christian age?"

This is a post-Christian Age? I don't think so.

[Mr. Silverback]

The dog has four legs, beause calling the tail a leg does not make it a leg.

[outlawcam]

Faith is a beautiful thing, and it exists completely outside reason. To try to "prove" faith through conventional methods is a fool's errand.

Actually faith and reason are not mutually exclusive. You are now guilty of the fallacy of false dilemma. Faith is a necessary component of everything we do, and we all have faith in one thing or another--including logic and reason itself (some of us do, anyway). Indeed, reason is a very important component of my faith. Without one, I could not have the other. Would you like me to elaborate?

[Mr. Silverback]

Ice cream preference is a matter of taste, Christianity is a matter of fact. But even if Christianity were bunk, the idea that anyone should believe that truth is truth just because they think it's truth is ludicrous.

[Alkhin]

I have found a wonderful book that might provide young people entering college with responses. What they most need is the courage to stand up for what they believe, because all the unbelievers have found a way to use a persons' self-doubt against them. They take advantage of the fact that the young person, wanting to seem open to new experiences, and willing to consider all sides fair, are usually ill-prepared with information about their own faith.

I know this, because it is what happened to me. I was always with the Catholic Student Center, but was unable to answer with a positive stance the aspersions cast my way by 'non-religious' people.

Oh, and anyeone going to college : avoid a group called The Great Commission. They are a CULT, not a group interested in spreading the Word of God. They may or may not have changed their name, but if they require that you cut off all ties to your family and new friends, and that you adhere to ONLY their philosophy of Christianity, then they are a group to be shunned.

[Alkhin]

OOOPS FORGOT TO POST THE NAME OF THE BOOK :

"Jesus Among Other Gods" by Ravi Zacharias.

A Very intelligent book.

[orionblamblam]

How odd. One set of believers in rather fanciful superstitions are gettign annoyed that other people believe in different fanciful superstitions, and aren't applying proper logic.

"Can we really make something true just by believing it?"

Well, everyone who believes in souls, ghosts, Heave, Hell, Nirvana, well-meaning liberal Democrats, demons and gods certainly seems to think so...

[FateAmenableToChange]

Actually faith and reason are not mutually exclusive. You are now guilty of the fallacy of false dilemma. Faith is a necessary component of everything we do, and we all have faith in one thing or another--including logic and reason itself (some of us do, anyway). Indeed, reason is a very important component of my faith. Without one, I could not have the other. Would you like me to elaborate?

In other words, Thomas Aquinas totally rocks, and there is a reason that - contrary to claims by anti-religionists - the church was one of the primary organs for preserving and advancing learning in both philosophy and the hard sciences for 1200 years after the fall of the Roman Empire. Generally, all we hear about is church censorship, like Galilleo's trial, not the development of foundations for Western scientific thought.

[outlawcam]

Thomas Aquinas totally rocks

He's a veritable rock star, one might say. ;)

[BikerNYC]

Matters of faith are matters of taste, that's what makes them matters of faith. It is not a coincidence that children tend to prefer the same kind of food and religion that their parents enjoyed. They both are matters of taste that tend to be drilled into you at an early age.

Moreover, if there were evidence, differential equations, and other mathematical proofs which would establish, for example, that Jesus Christ is the son of God, the belief in such would not be a matter of faith.

...the idea that anyone should believe that truth is truth just because they think it's truth is ludicrous.

Is something red because you think it's red or is it red in-itself? If it's red because you think "red," doesn't thinking the thing red make it red? On the other hand, if an object is red in-itself, where in the object is its "redness"? I think we often speak of things being true because we think them to be true.

[stuartcr]

With reference to this subject, since people do not respond equally to reason and logic...how does anyone determine what really is reasonable and logical?

[outlawcam]

Moreover, if there were evidence, differential equations, and other mathematical proofs which would establish, for example, that Jesus Christ is the son of God, the belief in such would not be a matter of faith.

It depends on whether or not you have faith in mathematical proofs and differential equations. However, the assertion is absurd on the face of it. You are holding Jesus to a higher standard of proof than you likely attribute to any historical figure. It is not that difficult to provide enough evidence of the Godhood of Jesus to demand a verdict. You must, however, have some faith in the historical sources--just like you must of any historical figure. Caesar for example. Or Aristotle.

What standards of proof do you require? How do you determine, historically speaking, if something did or did not happen? If Jesus truly did all it He claimed to do and truly did rise from the dead in the manner described in the Bible, wouldn't you agree that would be pretty compelling evidence?