(no subject)
I was actually trolling through the internet for a good quote about hope for my philsophy paper, but I found this. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Our lives are not determined by what happens to us but by how we react to what happens, not by what life brings to us, but by the attitude we bring to life. A positive attitude causes a chain reaction of positive thoughts, events, and outcomes. It is a catalyst, a spark that creates extraordinary results.
-Anon.
Now, as to the question of faith, hope and belief. Here is a paper that is based on another paper by a man who thinks that belief is not required for faith. Its not really a paper on whether faith, specifically in God, is rational or not. Its more about the differences between faith and hope and how they relate to belief. Its a tad random and not my best work, but I did promise to at least post some thoughts on the subject and I've been lax in posting. So, here is something....It will likely be grammar checked and whatnot before I turn it in. You get the roughish draft. So, read on Eric :)
In Louis Pojmans paper Faith Without Belief he spends a lot of time discussing faith, belief, hope and doubt. Specifically Pojman, near as I can tell, is arguing that belief is not a requirement for faith. This is a very different viewpoint than is usually shown in Western Theism. In fact, its rare to even hear people mention the idea of having faith in something that you do not believe in. It just doesn’t feel right to say. While his paper has lots of ideas, I mostly want to focus on one theme. It’s the Pojmans treatment of faith and belief, and for the most part it’s the discussion that takes place on pages 169-171.
On page 169 Pojman makes an analogy about Moses and Aaron. In the analogy Pojman says that Moses believes completely that God exists, he believes in God. Aaron on the other hand isn’t so sure, he lives in a profound hope that God exists. He is living “as if” God exits, because he really hopes God does, but he isn’t convinced. In short “Moses believes what Aaron only hopes for”. General Christianity would take issue to the idea that someone who merely lives as-if they believe in God is the same as someone who lives because they believe-in God.
Pojman goes on to claim that someone who lives in hope and if he is living with “an ethics of hope” and is honest with himself than the evidence may one day become to low for him to sustain his belief. This is where things get interesting, the rest was just a warm up.
Initially I misunderstood this statement, but I think its key. Pojman doesn’t say there may come a time when there is too little evidence for Hope, he says there may come a time when there is too little evidence for Faith. This would seem to give us an insight into the difference between hope and faith. Hope, it would seem, can stand alone. I could hope that snarks exist, even though the only being to see one is the Baker, and if you know the story he might have seen something worse. Back to the point, hope does not require any evidence to stand on. It merely is, no lack of evidence can remove ones hope in something. However, according to Pojman, if an honest and rational person were to find evidence against something they had faith in, say somehow God was proven to not exist in an undeniable way, though what that would look like is hard to fathom, than the theist should give up his faith and belief.
Faith requires some sort of reason, faith without reason is blind and requires that we run around and make some sort of absurd leap. I am not concerned with blind faith here, and I am not concerned so much with leaps of faith, though perhaps all faith requires a leap of sorts the real difference is the distance of the jump. I am concerned with faith that requires some sort of evidence. Faith and belief have quite a bit of common ground. Pojman seems to agree that this is the traditional view, he says “Usually, it is assumed that faith is a special type of belief”. Its this next quote though that where I think Pojman gets a little confused he says “For I see no good reason to exclude the possibility of coming to God in hope rather than belief”. This would mean that a person would have faith in something they hope in. I am of the opinion that where Pojman goes wrong here is that he is missing a step. I see no reason to think that one could start at hope that God exists, examine the evidence and than come to believe that God exists, but this changes t he equation. We now have faith in something we believe in, not something we hope in.
Earlier I claimed that faith requires some sort of reasoning, exactly what is a whole different topic, while hope can stand alone. That being said I see absolutely no reason to think we can have faith in something we only hope in. Hope is based on nothing other than a wish. Belief should be based on some reasons, even bad reasons, but it should have some sort of ground to stand on. Faith can go beyond reason because belief is not standing alone. Faith cannot go beyond hope because hope stands alone, you cannot go beyond hope and hope requires that nothing comes before. If this distinction is accurate, and I have reason to think its at the very least on the right track, than you cannot have faith in something you hope in.
What about faith and belief? The question seems to be what comes first. Is faith the reason for belief? Or belief the reason for faith? If it’s the first than you could have faith in something you don’t believe in because your faith might not be strong enough for your belief to stand on. If it’s the second, than belief is a requirement for faith. Right now I am claiming that faith is linked to belief. I am also claiming that belief comes before faith mainly because belief can be a reason, faith cannot be a reason to believe something. If someone asked you “Why do you believe in God” you cannot claim faith, that would be circular. You believe in God for reasons, and when your reasons run out than you can claim faith takes you the last few steps. However, I do not think you can start with faith.
There is a final thought here, because earlier I claimed that faith requires reasoning, you cannot have faith in something you do not believe in. What reason could there possibly be to have faith like that? Granted there are theists, Christians specifically, who make claims about blind faith, and leaps of faith. But those are absurd, and I choose the word carefully and I do not mean it in the positive light that it was originally intended. To be absolutely clear, faith in this paper is not blind, and its not leaping off cliffs. People get confused about this all the time, so I figured I would clarify how I am using the word faith.
Initially I was trying to track down a reason to claim that you could not have faith in something you do not believe in. However, my arguments wondered off and explored faith and hope, though the eventually returned to their source. Hopefully the ramblings were not too random. I think Pojman is wrong, you cannot have faith in something you do not believe, and you most certainly cannot have faith in something you only hope for. Of course, being the rational, open-minded person I “hope” I am, I could be wrong. But I believe I am right
Our lives are not determined by what happens to us but by how we react to what happens, not by what life brings to us, but by the attitude we bring to life. A positive attitude causes a chain reaction of positive thoughts, events, and outcomes. It is a catalyst, a spark that creates extraordinary results.
-Anon.
Now, as to the question of faith, hope and belief. Here is a paper that is based on another paper by a man who thinks that belief is not required for faith. Its not really a paper on whether faith, specifically in God, is rational or not. Its more about the differences between faith and hope and how they relate to belief. Its a tad random and not my best work, but I did promise to at least post some thoughts on the subject and I've been lax in posting. So, here is something....It will likely be grammar checked and whatnot before I turn it in. You get the roughish draft. So, read on Eric :)
In Louis Pojmans paper Faith Without Belief he spends a lot of time discussing faith, belief, hope and doubt. Specifically Pojman, near as I can tell, is arguing that belief is not a requirement for faith. This is a very different viewpoint than is usually shown in Western Theism. In fact, its rare to even hear people mention the idea of having faith in something that you do not believe in. It just doesn’t feel right to say. While his paper has lots of ideas, I mostly want to focus on one theme. It’s the Pojmans treatment of faith and belief, and for the most part it’s the discussion that takes place on pages 169-171.
On page 169 Pojman makes an analogy about Moses and Aaron. In the analogy Pojman says that Moses believes completely that God exists, he believes in God. Aaron on the other hand isn’t so sure, he lives in a profound hope that God exists. He is living “as if” God exits, because he really hopes God does, but he isn’t convinced. In short “Moses believes what Aaron only hopes for”. General Christianity would take issue to the idea that someone who merely lives as-if they believe in God is the same as someone who lives because they believe-in God.
Pojman goes on to claim that someone who lives in hope and if he is living with “an ethics of hope” and is honest with himself than the evidence may one day become to low for him to sustain his belief. This is where things get interesting, the rest was just a warm up.
Initially I misunderstood this statement, but I think its key. Pojman doesn’t say there may come a time when there is too little evidence for Hope, he says there may come a time when there is too little evidence for Faith. This would seem to give us an insight into the difference between hope and faith. Hope, it would seem, can stand alone. I could hope that snarks exist, even though the only being to see one is the Baker, and if you know the story he might have seen something worse. Back to the point, hope does not require any evidence to stand on. It merely is, no lack of evidence can remove ones hope in something. However, according to Pojman, if an honest and rational person were to find evidence against something they had faith in, say somehow God was proven to not exist in an undeniable way, though what that would look like is hard to fathom, than the theist should give up his faith and belief.
Faith requires some sort of reason, faith without reason is blind and requires that we run around and make some sort of absurd leap. I am not concerned with blind faith here, and I am not concerned so much with leaps of faith, though perhaps all faith requires a leap of sorts the real difference is the distance of the jump. I am concerned with faith that requires some sort of evidence. Faith and belief have quite a bit of common ground. Pojman seems to agree that this is the traditional view, he says “Usually, it is assumed that faith is a special type of belief”. Its this next quote though that where I think Pojman gets a little confused he says “For I see no good reason to exclude the possibility of coming to God in hope rather than belief”. This would mean that a person would have faith in something they hope in. I am of the opinion that where Pojman goes wrong here is that he is missing a step. I see no reason to think that one could start at hope that God exists, examine the evidence and than come to believe that God exists, but this changes t he equation. We now have faith in something we believe in, not something we hope in.
Earlier I claimed that faith requires some sort of reasoning, exactly what is a whole different topic, while hope can stand alone. That being said I see absolutely no reason to think we can have faith in something we only hope in. Hope is based on nothing other than a wish. Belief should be based on some reasons, even bad reasons, but it should have some sort of ground to stand on. Faith can go beyond reason because belief is not standing alone. Faith cannot go beyond hope because hope stands alone, you cannot go beyond hope and hope requires that nothing comes before. If this distinction is accurate, and I have reason to think its at the very least on the right track, than you cannot have faith in something you hope in.
What about faith and belief? The question seems to be what comes first. Is faith the reason for belief? Or belief the reason for faith? If it’s the first than you could have faith in something you don’t believe in because your faith might not be strong enough for your belief to stand on. If it’s the second, than belief is a requirement for faith. Right now I am claiming that faith is linked to belief. I am also claiming that belief comes before faith mainly because belief can be a reason, faith cannot be a reason to believe something. If someone asked you “Why do you believe in God” you cannot claim faith, that would be circular. You believe in God for reasons, and when your reasons run out than you can claim faith takes you the last few steps. However, I do not think you can start with faith.
There is a final thought here, because earlier I claimed that faith requires reasoning, you cannot have faith in something you do not believe in. What reason could there possibly be to have faith like that? Granted there are theists, Christians specifically, who make claims about blind faith, and leaps of faith. But those are absurd, and I choose the word carefully and I do not mean it in the positive light that it was originally intended. To be absolutely clear, faith in this paper is not blind, and its not leaping off cliffs. People get confused about this all the time, so I figured I would clarify how I am using the word faith.
Initially I was trying to track down a reason to claim that you could not have faith in something you do not believe in. However, my arguments wondered off and explored faith and hope, though the eventually returned to their source. Hopefully the ramblings were not too random. I think Pojman is wrong, you cannot have faith in something you do not believe, and you most certainly cannot have faith in something you only hope for. Of course, being the rational, open-minded person I “hope” I am, I could be wrong. But I believe I am right