Can you prove the external world exists?

[Tim]

... which came from this site:'
Faith has absolutely nothing to do with Science@Everything2.com
and written by someone named 'loon'

I love science - LOVE IT - and I have faith.

Faith does not mean that you can't or shouldn't ask questions. That is ridiculous. That is what I spend most of my time doing in my studies related to my faith - asking questions and finding answers.

Stating that not questioning things is the reason that faith should have no place in science is wrong.

I read that above quote differently Grace. I read it as... You are not supposed to question faith (Otherwise it wouldn't be faith) yet you are supposed to question everything to do with science. That's what science is all about, asking questions to come to some sort of conclusion. In science you are to look at all paths, yet not rely on any of them based on faith. That's why faith has no place in science. Once you base your scientific studies on faith you move from science into philosophical studies.

 

[IntruderLS1]

1) It doesn't take faith to believe in somehting that has been proven with data.

2) woahhhh when have I ever tried to de-convert someone? I must have missed that somewhere along the line.:confused In the end I don't care what people believe in. Hey, I would welcome threads that challenge atheism, it would be fun. The only reason I start threads on religion is to just start debate to sharpen minds instead of just doing nothing to make people think.


3) I never said I even take the thread argument to heart, or believe in it. I can't prove if we exist or not either way. If you read the thread, you would see that I don't really care if we exist or not, I take the natural world and reality as how I see it everyday. So, its as if the question doesn't even matter. The point of the thread wasn't to show what I think, its to just make people look at reality at a different angle.


4) I don't expect anyone to "jump on my bandwagon". We have established scientific data that show what the universe is and we have some theories on how it came to be. Could they be wrong? Sure, but thats the beauty of science, if we find better data we take it. Its just that from what I see, and what others see, the universe doesn't support a intelligent designer.


5) Science doesn't take any faith. its simple a scholastic process in which we make observations and make conjectures from there. Now where does faith come into that process? You're not in any way making some giant, celestial leap of faith when you make a hypothesis because you could be proven wrong and you KNOW that.



So what are these "foolish" things people will look back and laugh at? I can think of a few.

We're obviously not speaking the same language here. I don't understand your responses to what I said, as apparently you don't understand my response to what you said.

How did the universe start? Where did the matter come from that compressed to the point of explosion?

 

[dt3]

1) It doesn't take faith to believe in somehting that has been proven with data.

5) Science doesn't take any faith.

But you've already admitted that our personal observations can be wrong/tricked, and that a million people observing the same thing doesn't mean anything. Therefore, the data you choose to believe could be completely erroneous. But you have faith in it being true.

 

[GraceAbounds]

I read that above quote differently Grace. I read it as... You are not supposed to question faith (Otherwise it wouldn't be faith) yet you are supposed to question everything to do with science. That's what science is all about, asking questions to come to some sort of conclusion. In science you are to look at all paths, yet not rely on any of them based on faith. That's why faith has no place in science. Once you base your scientific studies on faith you move from science into philosophical studies.

I disagree with what I bolded.

If you believe that questioning faith is wrong then I see why your perspective is as such. But I don't agree that questioning my faith means that I have no faith. One can only question or introspect on something they have or are personally experiencing. I know that I have faith because I do both.

I agree with what you wrote that I put in red.

Questioning is a part of learning anything.

Stepping out in faith and being willing to question things blindly not knowing where it will lead you to is the process toward discovery. In a scientific test you set up controlled variable. In part you've put some faith in those controlled variables.

There are different ways the word faith can be used. In many ways it means to trust. I have faith in or I trust the scientific process. Both mean that I believe in it. In a world where we believe our perceptions are very faulty as has been discussed in this thread already - everything takes at least a small measure of faith/belief that our perceptions are correct and that includes believing a result from a scientific experiment.

Hopefully that better explains my perspective on the issue.

 

[GraceAbounds]

But you've already admitted that our personal observations can be wrong/tricked, and that a million people observing the same thing doesn't mean anything. Therefore, the data you choose to believe could be completely erroneous. But you have faith in it being true.

Exactly.

 

[Tim]

Ok, let me make my point a little clearer.

You have faith in God, are you saying you question his existence?

I see faith as the core of beliefs... sure there are aspects that need to be questioned concerning faith, but the core (God exists) cannot be questioned without losing said faith.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Yes, I have questioned whether God exists. That may mean to you that I have lost my faith. But to me it doesn't.

All it means is that I questioned it. If my questioning lead to the answer that no he does not exist, it is at that point that I would have lost my faith in God.

Another example: I can question the love I have for my husband, yet it doesn't mean that I don't love him anymore just because I question it. It only means that I am questioning it. If upon self examination I decided no, I don't love him anymore - it is at that point that the question then turns to 'no love' for my husband.

Questioning in and of itself does not remove one's faith in God. You can question, seek answers, and still walk forward in faith.

If someone has faith or believes that a science experiment is going to come out a certain way (a hypothesis) and when it doesn't come out the way they believed it would - this does not mean that there is something wrong with faith in or believing that something would happen that didn't. It is that faith or belief that lead us to the experiment in the first place.

Two different areas of study but - one's faith can grow from questioning just like scientific knowledge can grow from questioning.

 

[All Else Failed]

We're obviously not speaking the same language here. I don't understand your responses to what I said, as apparently you don't understand my response to what you said.

How did the universe start? Where did the matter come from that compressed to the point of explosion?

The big bang was not an explosion, but a rapid expansion of time and space.

Plus, NO ONE KNOWS how it all exactly began. We all have our own points of view, but i just think one has more credibility than the other when you look at ever aspect on why the two camps belive in what they beleive.

 

[All Else Failed]

But you've already admitted that our personal observations can be wrong/tricked, and that a million people observing the same thing doesn't mean anything. Therefore, the data you choose to believe could be completely erroneous. But you have faith in it being true.

Yes, all of my data could be false, and so could yours, yet like I have said 1,000,000 times in this thread, I don't care if this world is real or not. The quesiton does not matter to me, and I accept thenatural world as i see it. In that case, I look at the data like it is. What I believe in does not take faith, since I do not blindly follow it. Skepticism is the anti-faith.

 

[Silious950]

It started when I hit the "on" switch

 

[All Else Failed]

Plus, you cannot have faith in something you question. Faith **IS** belief without quesiton. I would say that when people question god, they do not have faith in him at all for that time period. If you have 100% faith in god, you do not question at all because tyou have faith in him! There would be no reason to.

 

[All Else Failed]

It started when I hit the "on" switch

That must have been one helluva' switch! :willy_nilly:

 

[GraceAbounds]

Plus, you cannot have faith in something you question. Faith **IS** belief without quesiton. I would say that when people question god, they do not have faith in him at all for that time period. If you have 100% faith in god, you do not question at all because tyou have faith in him!

Faith is not belief without question.

faith (f

th)n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

There would be no reason to.

Yes there would be. It's called curiosity.

 

[All Else Failed]

Faith is not belief without question.

faith (f

th)n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.


Yes there would be. It's called curiosity.

Those deifnitions only lend to what I said.


Like: "Secure belief in god and a trusting acceptance..."

You're not secure in your beliefs if you question them. If you have pure faith, you never ever question god.


If you question his existance, which is a major thing to do, you are taking into account that he may not exist that is not faith.

 

[All Else Failed]

I'm not interested in taking apart what you believe Grace, thats not my place so I'll end it there.

 

[IntruderLS1]

The big bang was not an explosion, but a rapid expansion of time and space.

Plus, NO ONE KNOWS how it all exactly began. We all have our own points of view, but i just think one has more credibility than the other when you look at ever aspect on why the two camps belive in what they beleive.

An explosion is a rapid expansion, but I suppose there is no need to quibble over this one.

No matter what, when you peel back the bang theory, EVENTUALLY, you have to have something from nothing. This is a physical impossibility.

What say you?

 

[All Else Failed]

An explosion is a rapid expansion, but I suppose there is no need to quibble over this one.

No matter what, when you peel back the bang theory, EVENTUALLY, you have to have something from nothing. This is a physical impossibility.

What say you?

Well I think we can admit that we do not know enough about the vastness of the universe to say for certain HOW it all began. We all could be wrong. Knowing this, whats to say that there is some sort of process that we don't understand yet that could generate matter from nothing? This by no means that this force is sentient, but a nonsentient process in physics we do not account for as of yet. This is pure speculation, but it could very well be so. Right now, the big bang theory is the thing that makes the most sense when we look at the data.


Its also a physical impossibility that somehting could "always be".

 

[GraceAbounds]

You are adding your own words to the definitions to suit the perspective you already formed and are also only focusing on one definition of the word 'faith' when in actuality the word has many meanings as noted in the definitions I posted. And you are also assuming that the definition you chose to focus on is the definition I chose to use in all of my posts in this thread whereby you'd be wrong in that assumption. Though from the context of my posts I don't see how one could get the meanings mixed up. If I am wrong in this and that is not the assumption you've made regarding my use of the word 'faith' in all of my posts then your arguments, at least the ones made in my direction, make no sense or don't actually address what I have been saying.

No where does it say in the above definitions that faith is belief without ever asking a question. That is your spin. Asking a question doesn't have to mean doubt, but yes sometimes it does. So if you are talking about faith from God, since it is considered to be a gift that is given in measure, not all will have 100% faith if you want to address it as a percentage as you did. The theological reasoning behind that is so that we don't compare ourselves up against each other, that we focus on our own walk, and so that we don't boast about something that was not of our own doing to begin with.

Now if you start talking about blind faith and pure faith, I could see more of your point - but that is not how this convo started out.

 

[All Else Failed]

You are adding your own words to the definitions to suit the perspective you already formed and are also only focusing on one definition of the word 'faith' when in actuality the word has many meanings as noted in the definitions I posted. And you are also assuming that the definition you chose to focus on is the definition I chose to use in all of my posts in this thread whereby you'd be wrong in that assumption. Though from the context of my posts I don't see how one could get the meanings mixed up. If I am wrong in this and that is not the assumption you've made regarding my use of the word 'faith' in all of my posts then your arguments, at least the ones made in my direction, make no sense or don't actually address what I have been saying.

No where does it say in the above definitions that faith is belief without ever asking a question. That is your spin. Asking a question doesn't have to mean doubt, but yes sometimes it does. So if you are talking about faith from God, since it is considered to be a gift that is given in measure, not all will have 100% faith if you want to address it as a percentage as you did. The theological reasoning behind that is so that we don't compare ourselves up against each other, that we focus on our own walk, and so that we don't boast about something that was not of our own doing to begin with.

Now if you start talking about blind faith and pure faith, I could see more of your point - but that is not how this convo started out.

Well if you're questioning his existance, thats extreme doubt.

 

[GraceAbounds]

I'm not interested in taking apart what you believe Grace, thats not my place so I'll end it there.

You can't take apart what I believe. Only I can do that. I'm enjoying our convo.

I think that the missing of the minds is in the different meanings of the word faith and how it has been used in this thread.