What do you place your faith in?

Originally posted by LemonJello
This conversation will be fruitless until you actually make it clear what you mean by 'faith'. My experience has been that there are any number of ways that term is taken, and they can diverge greatly. I try to avoid the term, but when I do use it I use it as an epistemic pejorative. Regardless of how I use it, what do you mean by the term here, specifically?

Using the definitions I have provided from my dictionary, what say you?

Originally posted by whodey
Are these definitions acceptable?

What do you mean? Why would you want to stipulate multiple, incompatible definitions for the one term that is at the very crux of the discussion?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
What do you mean? Why would you want to stipulate multiple, incompatible definitions for the one term that is at the very crux of the discussion?

Ok, since the word faith is often synonomous with religion, I think it is identified soley with religion. However, by the definitions provided I think it is clear that the common denomenator is the word trust.

Edit: Now do I have to define the word trust? You know, this is kinda like chasing your tail....that is if I had one to chase.

Originally posted by whodey
Ok, since the word faith is often synonomous with religion, I think it is identified soley with religion. However, by the definitions provided I think it is clear that the common denomenator is the word trust.

Edit: Now do I have to define the word trust? You know, this is kinda like chasing your tail....that is if I had one to chase.

Do you hereby stipulate that faith is trust? If so, I'm happy to accept such a stipulation without further definition. The topic then becomes, "What do you trust?," correct?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Do you hereby stipulate that faith is trust? If so, I'm happy to accept such a stipulation without further definition. The topic then becomes, "What do you trust?," correct?

Thesaurus.com defines faith as trust.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/faith

At the bottom-level, I put my reliance in clear-mind, or Buddha-mind. That is a kind of raw, pre-conceptual being-aware, a sort of empirical bedrock.

Stepping up from that, I put my reliance in reason, in my ability to form concepts and draw conclusions that are isomorphic* to the reality experienced in Buddha-mind.

However, as Starrman pointed out, I don’t live strictly according to reason, but also according to aesthetics. These aesthetics are also rooted in the perceived coherence and connectedness of the tathata (“thusness” or “suchness” ) of the world and myself as part of that tathata.

I have my own personal definition of “faith”, which has nothing to do with belief in the sense of deciding whether a proposition is true or false. For me, “faith” is an existential term, that has nothing to do with, say, expected outcomes from reliance on anything. Although I don’t recall him using the term, it has a bit to do with Camus’ vision of Sisyphus; it is purely an existential—and aesthetic—attitude. (If Camus did use the term, I suspect that it was with respect to the kind of “leap to a belief” that he rejected, among existentialists as well as religionists.)

* Attribution to Douglas Hofstadter and , recursively, to Dr. Scribbles.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Do you hereby stipulate that faith is trust? If so, I'm happy to accept such a stipulation without further definition. The topic then becomes, "What do you trust?," correct?

Correct

Originally posted by whodey
OK so the definitions that I have listed previously would include the term trust. So tell us, at what point did you trust your wife? What evidence was provided for you to do so? Also, even though you must have evidence for being able to trust her, is such evidence proof that you can trust her? And perhaps most importantly of all, does she believe in the tooth ferry? 😛

Hmmm, I'll start with the last one.
No, she doesn't but she'll claim otherwise in front of our kids.

I'm not sure about the notion that I must have evidence to trust her. I suppose that's true, but I don't treat my relationship with her as if it were some sort of scientific experiment.
I guess the evidence is in the nature of that relationship.
My trust in her is a simple truth to me - I know that I can trust her. How do I know this, you ask? Simply through the years of love that we've shared I suppose, although that's not going to be convincing to anyone outside the two of us.
At what point did I trust her?
Not sure on that one either.
Long term relationships are a bit like growing kids. Take a snapshot one year and then another one a year later, and the kid's bigger. But look at them from one day to the next and nothing seems to change, size wise.

Originally posted by whodey
Thanks for doing my dirty work for me. However, my dictionary says this:
1. a) A confident belief, trust
b) belief in God; religious conviction
2. Loyalty, allegence
3. A system of religious beliefs.

How are these for definitions for everyone? Are these definitions acceptable?

Only 1b and 3 are acceptable to me and then so, only in that they are simplistic definitions.

Originally posted by Starrman
Only 1b and 3 are acceptable to me and then so, only in that they are simplistic definitions.

I think we have all decided that what we are talking about is trust. Therefore, what say you?

Originally posted by amannion
Hmmm, I'll start with the last one.
No, she doesn't but she'll claim otherwise in front of our kids.

I'm not sure about the notion that I must have evidence to trust her. I suppose that's true, but I don't treat my relationship with her as if it were some sort of scientific experiment.
I guess the evidence is in the nature of that relationship.
My tru gger. But look at them from one day to the next and nothing seems to change, size wise.

So the love you share and have shared has generated such trust? To be honest, I would say that is probably the same answer for all of us...that is if we were all honest with ourselves and with each other. I like what you said about it not being a scienfic experiment. It has nothing to do with proving anything, does it? However, the first step is love, no? We simply would have trouble trusting another who has not showed us love in return at some point. I think this is the evidence at hand that is needed, even if it is not proof they will go awry at some point.

Originally posted by vistesd
At the bottom-level, I put my reliance in clear-mind, or Buddha-mind. That is a kind of raw, pre-conceptual being-aware, a sort of empirical bedrock.

Stepping up from that, I put my reliance in reason, in my ability to form concepts and draw conclusions that are isomorphic* to the reality experienced in Buddha-mind.

However, as Starrman pointed out, I ...[text shortened]... ll as religionists.)

* Attribution to Douglas Hofstadter and , recursively, to Dr. Scribbles.

Ok, what about the definition we have arrived at? What is your opinion about trusting? Surely this has nothing to do with whether a proposition is true or false either.

Originally posted by whodey
I think we have all decided that what we are talking about is trust. Therefore, what say you?

Why not call it trust then? Why reifiy it as having some other mystical qualities by using the word faith?

I put my trust in things which my experience suggests have probable outcomes.

Originally posted by whodey
Ok, what about the definition we have arrived at? What is your opinion about trusting? Surely this has nothing to do with whether a proposition is true or false either.

Of course it does, you trust what you have experienced, therefore what you understand to be the probable outcome of things and the truth and falsity of those outcomes.

Originally posted by Starrman
Why not call it trust then? Why reifiy it as having some other mystical qualities by using the word faith?

I put my trust in things which my experience suggests have probable outcomes.

Ok, so at what point do you have enough evidence to conclude that it is a probable outcome to place your faith in something or someone? If I am not mistaken, these "probable outcomes" are evidences, not proofs, as to why you place your faith in something, no?