Doubt good, certainty bad

Originally posted by FMF
I already understand that this is your opinion because you quoted a book that mentioned "being blown around like a wave of the sea".

Its not only my opinion, but clearly your unwillingness to state that your own moral
stance is subject to change because of social convention leaves me wondering about
the validity of doubting, after all, if one is unsure of how one arrived at a particular
position its unlikely one will be able to see clearly the solution, is it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its not only my opinion, but clearly your unwillingness to state that your own moral
stance is subject to change because of social convention leaves me wondering about
the validity of doubting, after all, if one is unsure of how one arrived at a particular
position its unlikely one will be able to see clearly the solution, is it.

One can obviously have morals without subscribing to the Bible and morals can obviously evolve and change. Obviously. If you want to start a thread about "secular liberals" or "social change" and "sin" against "God", then please do. You disgree with what I said in my OP. That's what I wanted to know.

Originally posted by FMF
I contend that a constant embrace of doubt offers people a way to resist the intellectual and spiritual constraints of ideology, a means of resisting religionist dogma and its purported "authority", and resisting speculation being turned into "certainty" which in turn becomes a crutch which so often seems, in turn, to extinguish genuine curiosity. Doubt helps to ...[text shortened]... ing. It is the essence of informed free will.

Does anyone see doubt in a similar light?

Yes, good points. Embracing at least some measure of doubt is almost always appropriate, as well, since our evidence is virtually never such that it justifies our being certain in our judgments. Presumably, too, there are some norms in play regarding how much doubt we should ideally carry (for instance, that it be consistent with the strength of our evidence, or some such).

Originally posted by FMF
By "truth" you mean Jesus is our saviour?

No.

I mean, philosophically, to doubt what one knows is truth is mind numbingly stupid.

Originally posted by josephw
Do you doubt you will die someday?

You have no doubt that an afterlife awaits you if you live your life in accordance with certain religious teachings, presumably.

Originally posted by josephw
No.

I mean, philosophically, to doubt what one knows is truth is mind numbingly stupid.

Give me some examples of "truth" here. I think you may have missed the point of my OP.

Originally posted by FMF
I contend that a constant embrace of doubt offers people a way to resist the intellectual and spiritual constraints of ideology, a means of resisting religionist dogma and its purported "authority", and resisting speculation being turned into "certainty" which in turn becomes a crutch which so often seems, in turn, to extinguish genuine curiosity. Doubt helps to ing. It is the essence of informed free will.

Does anyone see doubt in a similar light?

There is a time and place for everything. There is a time to doubt and a time for faith, depending on who and what we are discussing. It then takes wisdom to know when to use which and for whom and what.

Without doubt, we would not question anything or anyone. Without faith, our lives would be devoid of hope as we would devolve into a cynical cripple.

At some point in a relationship, we have an option to either trust the other party or not to trust them. If we decide to trust them, then coninuous doubting would drive the relationship into ruine. Of course, there are other times when trusting the other party would not be wise. Again, it takes wisdom to know the difference to do either but to waffle between the two is perhaps the worst decision one can make. It would be better to let the other party know we do not trust them once than to pretend we do and then continually question their integrity or ability.

Originally posted by FMF
Your religionist literature tells you to be certain that your religionist literature is right. This is not for me, robbie.

The content? I am not a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. I do not acknowledge "the Lord" as you perceive and present him, let alone expect to receive anything from him. I am not double-minded and unstable in all I do. There. Refuted, as far as my spiritual path is concerned.

I don't view you as a wave tossed upon the sea FMF. I find that you are pretty sure of things you believe, such as not believing the Bible as God inspired. In this sense, doubt it absent.

Is this a good thing?

Originally posted by whodey
I don't view you as a wave tossed upon the sea FMF. I find that you are pretty sure of things you believe, such as not believing the Bible as God inspired. In this sense, doubt it absent.

Doubt is absent? How so?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am not alleging anything in your life FMF, i am merely asserting that because of
changes in social convention, your own morality has been formed, are you denying
that this is the case? Indeed one is left with the question, as you have stated your not
a religionists, where then does the values which form your morality come from? One is
lef ...[text shortened]... unds you, where else? If this is
the case, then clearly its susceptible to change, is it not?

Just another circular argument; all the stability and unchanging certainty that you claim for Christianity or any religion is based upon them being true rather than a delusion created by the winds of change interacting with a human desire for truth and certainty.

Christianity is itself the result of schism between those who adhered to the old testament/Torah and a new sect of Jews. It seems God is also driven by the prevailing winds.

Originally posted by josephw
Doubt is a good thing when one is dealing with uncertainty, but has no value when confronted with the truth.

To doubt the truth is mind numbingly stupid. To doubt that something is true when one doesn't have all the facts is healthy.

For example: There is no doubt that human beings know very little about anything.

OR

It is doubtful there is any human being that knows everything.

How can you possibly know with absolute certainty that you HAVE the truth so as not to doubt it?

Originally posted by whodey
....Without faith, our lives would be devoid of hope as we would devolve into a cynical cripple.....

Oh no you don't.
You don't get to make such a sweeping slur against every atheist without backing it up.

You just claimed that every atheist is a cynical cripple.

Prove it or apologise.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Oh no you don't.
You don't get to make such a sweeping slur against every atheist without backing it up.

You just claimed that every atheist is a cynical cripple.

Prove it or apologise.

When whodey talks about "faith" like this he is using it to mean 'trusting other people' - at least that's how remember it from the last time.

Originally posted by FMF
When whodey talks about "faith" like this he is using it to mean 'trusting other people' - at least that's how remember it from the last time.

There is a word for trusting other people.... it's trust.

Faith and trust do not mean the same thing.


If he is using faith to mean trust then he is being unclear.

This is a forum for discussing spirituality philosophy and religion.

The word faith has overt religious connotations and it's most prominent two meanings are
"to believe without evidence or despite all evidence" and to "have a religious faith, a belief in
a god or gods and surrounding mythologies".

Thus to use the word faith, given the context of being on a religion forum where the word faith
is understood to mean religious belief and belief without evidence, to mean trust is inherently asking
to be misunderstood. Either intentionally or otherwise.


Faith does not mean trust. If he means trust he should say trust.

Faith means something else