Hi Ham,
> > You assert:
> >
> >> Faith is belief in anything without empirical evidence, and that includes
> >> the MoQ which carries its own baggage of dogma.
[Platt]
> > What is the empirical evidence for your belief that faith is what you say
> > it is? Seems to me you are asserting a premise that is self-contradictory
> > -- a premise unsupported by empirical evidence -- and thus is based on
> > faith. Your assertion seems to carry its own baggage of dogma.
{Ham]
> The empirical evidence for the meaning of a word is its use in communicating
> a thought or concept to others. Dictionaries define common word usage.
> According to my Websters New Collegiate Dictionary, Faith is "1a: allegiance
> to duty or a person, 1b: fidelity to one's promises; 2a: belief and trust in
> and loyalty to God, 2b: firm belief in something for which there is no
> proof." So I don't see how you can challenge what you or I, Steve or Ian,
> mean by Faith.
[Platt]
A dictionary definition of a word constitutes empirical evidence? That
apparently means empirical evidence now includes what is cited by an
authority -- a very shaky interpretation of empiricism it seems to me. The
physical senses upon which empiricism rests do not observe word meanings.
> The point I was trying to make is that faith itself is not a bad thing, and
> that ending or eradicating it would be denying the spirituality of man upon
> which all conviction and trust is based. Thus, if you believe in individual
> freedom, patriotism, the sanctity of human life, and moral goodness, they
> are part of a faith-based philosophy which makes Platt Holden a man of
> integrity and moral character.
Right you are. But it goes beyond spirituality. Scratch the bottom of any
belief and you'll find faith. Personally I place great faith in Beauty.
> On the other hand, if you are indoctrinated into a culture that subordinates
> your freedom and behavior to the will of a divine being which demands total
> submission to the words of a 7th century prophet, you have lost your
> individuality as a rational, self-directed human being. As Hirsi Ali says,
> "that is immoral". That, my good friend, is the evil we are fighting in the
> Islamic world. We should not conflate it with "faith", "theism", or even
> "religious intolerance" which is really a form of discrimination.
Yes. There are plenty of religious bigots around. As for the evil we are
fighting, it is not so much total submission to the will of a divine that
is evil (although that's bad enough) but the initiation of physical force
for reasons other than self-defense against physical attack. .
> Incidentally, while I've got your attention, you haven't responded to my
> off-line request for your home address so that I can send you the book I'd
> promised. In case that message wasn't received, you can contact me at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't know you had made the offer. I'd be delighted to receive a copy. I
will contact you as you suggest. Thanks much.
Best regards,
Platt
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
