Nick, As I understand your position the words "faith" and "belief" are synonyms. I would prefer a definition for "faith" that distinguishes it from "belief."
Tory, Thanks for you comment on my posts. I'm glad you enjoy them. My definition of faith makes use of the notion of the everyday world. But I'm not saying that the everyday world is the same for everyone. Your everyday world may be different from mine. I'm just saying that believing that the world will continue to conform to *your *sense of what the everyday world is like is not faith; it's simple belief. Eric, I would take "having faith in something" in the colloquial sense as different from "faith" in a religious context, which is what I was focusing on. *-- Russ * On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Victoria Hughes <[email protected]>wrote: > > Russ wrote, in part- > > Faith, I would say (in fact I did earlier) > > > is believing something that one wouldn't otherwise believe without faith. > > > Believing that the everyday world is the everyday world > > > doesn't seem to me to require faith. > > > Russ, with all due respect for the enjoyment I get from your posts, I find > this suspiciously tautological. > > Who are you to define for the rest of humanity (and other sentient life > forms) what 'the everyday world' incorporates? Numerous 'for instance' > cases can immediately be made here. All you can do is define what you > believe for yourself. You cannot extrapolate what is defensible for others > to believe, from your own beliefs. > > And this statement ' Faith is believing something that one wouldn't > believe without faith'. Hm and hm again. > > Eagleman's new book > Incognito<http://www.amazon.com/Incognito-Secret-Lives-David-Eagleman/dp/0307389928/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348460523&sr=1-1&keywords=incognito+by+david+eagleman> > offers > fruitful information from recent neuroscience that may interest others on > this list. His ultimate sections bring up hard questions about legal and > ethical issues in the face of the myriad 'zombie programs' that run most of > our behaviour. This looks like - but is not as simplistic as - 'yet another > pop science book.' > > A review David Eagleman's "Incognito" - > Brainiac<http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2011/06/david_eaglemans.html> > > Tory > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
