[Mb-civic] Re: Debate Over Faith

[richard haase]

i was just kibbitzing
and being serious
philosophizing
im a born again christian ian
as well as being a big jew face
( im sure you can relate )
peace and love ian
were mishbuchah
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian" <ialterman at nyc.rr.com>
To: <mb-civic at islandlists.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Mb-civic] Re: Debate Over Faith


> Richard:
>
> Assuming you're not being facetious, of course I agree.  Indeed, even
Darwin
> believed this, despite attempts to turn him into some anti-God zealot.
>
> However, you're gonna have a hard time getting most of the Civic
membership
> to agree!
>
> Peace.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "richard haase" <hotprojects at nyc.rr.com>
> To: <mb-civic at islandlists.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [Mb-civic] Re: Debate Over Faith
>
>
> > of course both god/the bible and darwin work together
> > you just havent figured it out right
> >
> > the pts of unexplainable biological change eg mutation in there is the
> > hand
> > of god
> > very simple
> > darwin and intelligent design all work together
> > by grace of jesus
> > ?
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Ian" <ialterman at nyc.rr.com>
> > To: "Patrick Hunter" <hunter at sopris.net>; <mb-civic at islandlists.com>;
> > "Michael Butler" <michael at michaelbutler.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:53 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Mb-civic] Re: Debate Over Faith
> >
> >
> >> Pat:
> >>
> >> With all due respect, this is absurd.  The search for a "God gene" has
> > gone
> >> exactly nowhere, providing even less data than the search for a "gay
> > gene."
> >> Thus, your assumption that faith and belief are simply "human
behaviors"
> > is
> >> based on zero empirical or even quasi-scientific evidence.
> >>
> >> And although you may be somewhat correct re faith and religion playing
a
> >> role in "survival of the species" - in as much as it provides a strong
> >> "tribal" bond that might allow one tribe to survive while another does
> > not -
> >> this argument falls apart completely once the notion of "individuality"
> >> enters the picture, sometime around 10,000 years ago.  Thus, like any
> >> eventually useless (or at least unnecessary) "survival" trait, based on
> >> Darwinian theory we would have expected it to be "weeded out" once it
no
> >> longer played a role in survival.  That it remains the strongest bond
on
> > the
> >> planet belies your position entirely.
> >>
> >> Let me suggest another possibility.
> >>
> >> I believe that faith is something like a "sixth sense" - not in the way
> > that
> >> term is bandied about re "psi powers," but rather in a very real, human
> > way.
> >> Sight, hearing, smell, touch, taste.  We call each of these "senses"
> > because
> >> they "capture" "hard data" which our brains then turn into useful
> >> information.  Yet consider.  If you tried explaining sight to a person
> >> who
> >> was blind from birth, s/he would never "get it."  Sure, you could put a
> >> piece of paper in his/her hands and say, "this is a piece of paper," or
> >> "this is a square."  But you would not be explaining "sight," you would
> >> simply be noting "solidity" and "form," which are both "touch"-based.
> >> And
> >> forget entirely about trying to explain "color" - s/he would think you
> >> are
> >> daft.  Similarly, if you tried explaining hearing to a person who was
> >> born
> >> deaf, they would never "get it."  You might be able to do so
> >> intellectually - i.e., by having them read about it, even to the most
> >> technical degree - but, again, the limits of language would preclude
the
> >> ability to truly explain "hearing" in a way in which they would
> >> "experience" - and thus "understand" - that particular sense.
> >>
> >> It is in this context that I see faith as a "sense": because if someone
> >> lacks that sense, then there is no way in which a person who has it can
> >> adequately explain it.  This is not a simple matter of "proof" of one's
> >> belief.  After all (to sidebar relatedly here), one cannot "prove"
> >> "feelings," one can only describe the thoughts, actions and related
> > feelings
> >> associated with them.  That is, one cannot "prove" the existence of
love,
> >> anger, joy, sadness, etc.  One can only express those feelings via
> > thought,
> >> word and action.  [Indeed, it occurs to me that describing feelings is
> >> exactly similar to describing faith.  After all, non-believers accuse
> >> faith-based people of "talking in circles"; e.g., "I have faith because
I
> >> believe.  I believe because I have faith."  Even I can see the
difficulty
> >> that non-believers have with such circular logic.  However, describe
> > "love."
> >> Or "anger."  Or "joy."  I believe that, in doing so, you will find
> > yourself
> >> using the same sort of circular logic inherent in a description of
> >> faith.]
> >>
> >> Similarly, one cannot "prove" faith.  One can only describe the
thoughts,
> >> actions and feelings associated with it.  This is because, just as
> > language
> >> is limited in its ability to describe a particular "sense" to a person
> >> who
> >
> >> has never had that sense, language is limited in its ability to
describe
> >> "faith" to a person who lacks that "sense."  Thus, your inference that
> > faith
> >> is "not rational" only holds water if you are also willing to say the
> >> same
> >> thing about love, anger, joy, sadness, etc.
> >>
> >> Peace.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> From: "Patrick Hunter" <hunter at sopris.net>
> >> To: "Michael Butler" <michael at michaelbutler.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 2:54 PM
> >> Subject: [Mb-civic] Re: Debate Over Faith
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi Michael,
> >> >
> >> > Human behaviors, such as religion and worship, are rooted in our
> >> > genetic
> >> > make-up.  Our genes are the result of thousands of years of evolution
> > and
> >> > adaptation to the realities of existence.  Humans that followed
> > religions
> >> > proved to be successful and passed on their genes.  Humans with these
> >> > traits persevered because groups succeeded where individuals could
not.
> >> > Thinking beings were more successful when they could point to reasons
> > for
> >> > the otherwise unexplainable world they found themselves in. (Less
> > anxiety
> >> > and stress, therefore better health and longevity.)
> >> >
> >> > Religious obediance and support of your group's political leadership
> > have
> >> > a lot in common.  Going it alone is very hard, and not as successful.
> >> > Better to fit in with the group and to follow your leaders.
> >> >
> >> > If science could ever truly discover the "meaning of life", things
> >> > might
> >> > evolve.  (Will that be allowed?)  There may someday be an option to
> >> > deactivate the religion genes.  What a battle that will be.
> >> >
> >> > Debating religion is trading one theory of the supernatural for
> >> > another.
> >> > None of it is rational or factional.  It may be useful for mental
> >> > exercise, but so are crossword puzzles.
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Pat Hunter
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> > From: "Michael Butler" <michael at michaelbutler.com>
> >> > To: "SPECIAL from Michael Butler" <michael at michaelbutler.com>
> >> > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 11:26 PM
> >> > Subject: Debate Over Faith
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Michael Butler's Blog
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.michaelbutler.com/mbblog.html
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.michaelbutler.com
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Mb-civic mailing list
> >> > Mb-civic at islandlists.com
> >> > http://www.islandlists.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mb-civic
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mb-civic mailing list
> >> Mb-civic at islandlists.com
> >> http://www.islandlists.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mb-civic
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mb-civic mailing list
> > Mb-civic at islandlists.com
> > http://www.islandlists.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mb-civic
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mb-civic mailing list
> Mb-civic at islandlists.com
> http://www.islandlists.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mb-civic