Posted on 10/02/2002 5:56:51 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
The theist posits an entity, therefore, the burden of proof properly rests with him. Furthermore, it is impossible to prove a negative. It is not logical to surmise that gravity doesn't exist, but rather that little angels, which are invisible and undetectable, grab hold of objects and make them fall, and then leave the burden of proof on those who doubt it to prove that these angels don't exist. After all, I just said they were undetectable, so how could you!
(2) This not being possible in any way that is of immediate interest to religious belief, how does the believer regard his inability to prove the truth of faith in the manner the skeptic demands?
Faith and proof are fundmentally at odds, which the skeptic must admit. Faith by definition is belief in something without proof - if there were proof, it wouldn't be faith, it would be rational belief. If the skeptic were to come up with some criterion that, if satisfied, would establish the existence of God, and those circumstances happened, then the skeptic would be convinced and become a believer. But then his belief wouldn't be faith.
I've always been into philosophy and especially the teachings of the "Angelic Doctor" as you might have guessed. I've wondered about this issue before and I thought this essay was a good take on it.
I guess this was supposed to be filed under religion, but I forgot how.
Depends how you define faith and proof. You can prove the existence of God as well as you can prove the existence of other minds. Therefore, it seems to me that it takes more "faith" to believe that God and other minds don't exist than to believe that they do.
You're right. We really cannot provide an explanation. (And I'm still wondering about that one). No one knows the answer. We humans are very limited in our scope, and we will never know all of the answers.
or a non-contradictory explanation for the truth of any proposition, including the proposition that "atheism is true."
"Atheism" simply means "without belief" (a-theism). Many people do not "believe" in things for which no credible evidence has ever been offered. There's no contradiction there.
I have a direct experience of my own mind, but no direct experience of God. I can reasonably believe that other people are just like me in also having minds. But whether or not God exists is outside that fact ... it remains to be demonstrated by other means. Simply asserting that atheists lack explanations for various things falls short of a logical proof of God - the discovery of gravity didn't make the aforementioned angels vanish. They either were never there, or they are still there (but remain undetected).
Therefore, it seems to me that it takes more "faith" to believe that God and other minds don't exist than to believe that they do.
This doesn't follow, because "God" and "other minds" are very different things. Whether or not other minds exist rests on a very different argument than whether or not God exists.
No it doesnt, that is ridiculous. Sort or like defining the meaning of "is", don't you think?
Faith is not some wiggle word meaning one thing to some and something else to others. Nor is the word 'proof' for that matter.
Faith is a REQUIREMENT for a theist belief, only because PROOF is not availible. To prove the existence of other minds, one needs only to address another mind as I address you.
It is doubtful that you can post a message to God on this forum; where it's response(from said God) would be viewable to theists and non-theists alike here in this thread.
My own believe is that one should live their life in a manner that covers either side of the argument.
That's not possible since there are more than two views -- there are an infinite number of possible "Gods", not all of them are nice fellas.
I have often thought about this when I think of Christians becoming argumentative about their faith. (Something that I was guilty of in the past.) This is just something that I have been thinking for awhile and this thread offered me a chance to express it.
That's from dictionary.com.
Personally, whenever someone tries to "prove" their faith, it makes me question it all the more. The whole point of faith in a higher power is that there is no proof. If there were proof, by definition, it wouldn't be faith, and it wouldn't be nearly as remarkable.
Atheism is a "belief" that there is no God... it is not without belief as living without a belief is impossible...you must either belive in God or Not..either way it is still "belief" that you have "faith" that your assumptions are the correct ones....
Agnostics claim to "believe" that there isnt enough evidence for them to believe either way and so they choose to "believe" in the correctness of their evaluation..
Either way (since the unbeliever will not accept the evidence offered ) a type of faith or "belief" is necessary. Not accepting the evidence offered is a "belief" that your version of reality is the correct one...
And naturally the same thing may be said of believers in God and Jesus Christ...
But one may also believe in God ...yet not follow...One may know for a fact that Christ is the only way to salvation...and that he is God made man..yet not have a relationship with Him... In each case the atheist and the believer each have "faith" in their respective versions of reality...
In the case of the believer in God and Christ...it is God Himself in the person of The Holy Spirit that provides the "faith" necessary for a man to come to the reality of the knowledge of God and to acknowledge Christ as Savior..
Usually, the onus is placed upon the followers to spread the message of the God they follow. Isnt that true? I believe that living a life detached from a need to proof or unprove anything, is a life free from the pending doom of making the wrong choice.
If there is a God, fine. If not, okay. A life that repects life, nature and truth should not offend anyone's lord.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.