1 edit
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith in someone since such evidence could never lead to proof? Also can we have hope for something that seems impossible? Should we simply focus on what seems statistically plausable and throw away hope even if it is for a loved one who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
Originally posted by whodeyThere is no conflict between logic/reason and love or hope. Where is the conflict between them?
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith i ...[text shortened]... ne who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so?
What would you define as being proper evidence?
Originally posted by whodeyIsn't this why God gave us the ability to reason so we could use logic
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith i ...[text shortened]... ne who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
to prove His existence and sent His only begotten Son as evidence?
Originally posted by RJHindsWe cant prove "His" existence through logic-
Isn't this why God gave us the ability to reason so we could use logic
to prove His existence and sent His only begotten Son as evidence?
by nature ,that which you call "God" cannot be assesed by means of the normal human kens of knowledge.
(still, soemthing slips through....every now and then 🙂 )
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyThe joy I used to think I would never experience is, I have faith and hope, plus my reasons for it are to me completely logical and reasonable.
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith i ...[text shortened]... ne who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
Originally posted by PsychoPawnYou tell me. You are the one who insists that logic and love do not contradict each other. So how does one logically prove their love is "good" and justified?
There is no conflict between logic/reason and love or hope. Where is the conflict between them?
[b]For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so?
What would you define as being proper evidence?[/b]
Originally posted by sumydidThis reminds me of a story in the Bible where St. Paul is held captive in a prison cell chained to a wall. He and others begin to praise God, inexplicably so. There was not logic behind such praise due to the fact they were being held captive and assumingly about to die.
The joy I used to think I would never experience is, I have faith and hope, plus my reasons for it are to me completely logical and reasonable.
Then again, is this the logic we all need in the midst of hopelessness? After all, once hope is gone so is our reason for existing.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by whodeyAs a secularist I see absolutely no reason to throw out faith hope or love.
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith i ...[text shortened]... ne who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
I talk about the value of reason, rationality, logic and evidence as much (or more than) the next guy.
But this doesn't mean I don't hope, or love, or have faith in things or people.
The question is not whether or not to have these thoughts and/or feelings.
It's when and how you use them.
Logic and reason are immensely important tools for making sound judgements and exploring our reality.
but so are emotions.
Morals would be without meaning if we could not feel pain, love, empathy, hope or joy.
Nobody feels guilty if they turn a computer on and off.
You can hope for the best, against all odds. You are just better of planning with logic and reason, this
is no reason not to hope for better.
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyJust to pre-empt the point you may wish to make later... one may have insufficient data to sufficiently demonstrate that their love for someone else is justified but usually what they do have is infinitely more than than all the valid data pointing to the existence of a god (i.e. amount of valid evidence for god = non, nil, zilch, diddly squat, centre of a donut, ...)
What is the compatibility between logic and reason, on the one hand, and faith/hope and love, on the other hand? This seems to be the divide between secularism and relgion in large part.
For example, is it logical to love someone or place your faith in them without proper evidence to do so? In fact, how much evidence should we have to place our faith i ...[text shortened]... ne who seems to have taken the wrong path in life? Should we simply discard them at that point?
Originally posted by AgergThat is funny. I got a good laugh, even though it was not accurate.
Just to pre-empt the point you may wish to make later... one may have insufficient data to sufficiently demonstrate that their love for someone else is justified but usually what they do have is infinitely more than than all the valid data pointing to the existence of a god (i.e. amount of valid evidence for god = non, nil, zilch, diddly squat, centre of a donut, ...)
2 edits
Originally posted by AgergAgerg,
Just to pre-empt the point you may wish to make later... one may have insufficient data to sufficiently demonstrate that their love for someone else is justified but usually what they do have is infinitely more than than all the valid data pointing to the existence of a god (i.e. amount of valid evidence for god = non, nil, zilch, diddly squat, centre of a donut, ...)
The evidence you have for God (apart from the testimonies of countless people) is zilch.
That doesn't mean the evidence someone else has is zilch.
There is such a thing as personal experience.
You are perfectly entitled to dismiss the testimony of others and dismiss the personal experience of others. You are perfectly entitled to believe in some kind of mass conspiracy where every testimony and personal experience is a blatant lie conjured up in order to fool the likes of you.
Just don't expect to always be correct in your conclusions when you reject part of the evidence.
Originally posted by sumydidApparently personal experience is not worth much ,as far as any sort of evidence goes.
Agerg,
The evidence you have for God (apart from the testimonies of countless people) is zilch.
That doesn't mean the evidence someone else has is zilch.
There is such a thing as personal experience.
You are perfectly entitled to dismiss the testimony of others and dismiss the personal experience of others. You are perfectly enti ...[text shortened]... st don't expect to always be correct in your conclusions when you reject part of the evidence.
2 edits
Originally posted by sumydidI stand by what I said. I acknowledge that personal testimonies along with other forms of `evidence' compel some people to believe; for that reason I paired "evidence" with "valid".
Agerg,
The evidence you have for God (apart from the testimonies of countless people) is zilch.
That doesn't mean the evidence someone else has is zilch.
There is such a thing as personal experience.
You are perfectly entitled to dismiss the testimony of others and dismiss the personal experience of others. You are perfectly enti ...[text shortened]... st don't expect to always be correct in your conclusions when you reject part of the evidence.
Neither I nor any other (sane) person need suppose say they're lying, we can simply suppose their recall or evaluation of these personal experiences doesn't match what actually happened. That we can have millions of people reporting these experiences is just a consequence of this planet having nearly 7 billion people living on it. It is far more reasonable to assume that for each and every one of these people, they are mistaken than to assume that for each person the laws of physics didn't apply in some instance.