Page all of 7 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#45288 - 12/20/10 04:41 AM Faith - Dirty word or misconception?
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Tonight has been the night of knowledge! I have forged forth through the weary PLAINS of Might is Right and plunged into the "deep" of the ONA. I have purged myself of the "atheistic LeVay" and opened up the booklets FCoS. Raiding the internet and following through on an enlightened journey through Satanism. Gobbling up, so to speak, every speck and leaving no road untraveled. (Okay, I am sure that there a many others to follow.) Throwing concepts against the wall like basketballs and seeing which ones return to me and which ones fall flat against the ground.

It fascinates me the different grounds that are covered by the umbrella term of Satanism. All having their own unique insights and their own flaws. Although all of them overturn the idealism of having flaws. All creating a window for the basic idea that they are right; a likeness in all Satanists. The standing up with a voice, the do-ism attitude and the platitude in which a Satanist clams up with their ego in the forefront. This blatant disregard for all else other than self.

I have searched link by link, book by book and, for technology's sake, pdf br pdf. Satanism can be more as referred as a blank canvas desert in which we hold the paint brushes and declare our rights as our psychodrama sees fit. The ritual basis of Satanism remains an individuals mystic playground and even the atheists can play. Imagine a game with only winners.. we accept the losers as we see fit because the idea of the game is to pick and choose. Can a loser be a winner?

My mind fills with rot of what others follow and preach. Even in my mind I see a never ending list in which I will go down and tick off yes or no. Yes, no, yes, no, no, yes. An evolving perspective of an imagination gone wild. The consequences? There are none because I do not envision any. You are a part of MY world because I see it fit for you to exist in my world. Delusional? Perhaps someone that sees something clearly in the real world would be claimed to be as such for saying "you don't exist just because you say you exist". Imagine, if you will, someone standing right in front of you. Do they exist because they are a physical presence in your field of vision? Or do they exist because you acknowledge that they are in your field of vision?

More abstractly, in internet networking, do the characters that you entertain and converse with offer anything other than plain text to you that prove that you are real? This is even more so put in as a notion with networking systems that come with an "ignore button". Ignore buttons to delete the person from existence. There are chat rooms in which you can also converse with others but unless they get on cam, do they offer you anything other than their text on a screen for you to believe that they are real? Is this just the usage of faith?

I do not remember who said it, I believe it was Jason King, but when you go to a grocery store to buy a can of soup is it not faith that you are employing when you buy it? Not through action, but through the thought that what you are buying is actually soup. I remember hearing this and I double think every time I look at a can of soup, humorously. You believe that there is soup in the can because every time that you have bought that soup, there has been soup. It's a mini trial and error process that we subconsciously use ALL the time. Those who trial faith, whether it's existence or not, have to give that a little thought. Every day you wake up, do your morning routine and head off to work (you, of course, used very generally).. you have certain things that you do that work for you because of this mini trial and error process.

One day, you go into the grocery store and buy a can of soup. When you get home and open the can, you find that it is writhing with mold even though the date is far from it's expiration. What do you do? Obviously throw the soup away. However, how will you look at the next can of soup when you go to buy it? Will you instead opt for spaghetti os? Or, even better, will you decide to override you want for ANYTHING in a can and instead prefer something you can see outright? I, for one, would take the last and probably would not be able to trust anything in can for a LONG time.

I see people that are almost butthurt by the things that they can't see. Allowing words like "faith" or "spirituality" get to them like a knife. The dismissal is not unwarranted for those who hold no need to believe in "shadows on the walls" or the deities above. I do not withhold my beliefs in which I do not believe that there is a physical god or devil. I have never believed in heaven or hell since my own understanding of faith and religion. However, I do think that there is some merit in being able to come to peace with the idealism of "faith". You take steps in "faith" everyday. You go to bed with the idea, the "faith", that you will wake up the next day. You go to work everyday with the "faith" that you will still have it when you get there. Since when did "faith" have to hand in hand with "spirituality"?

Faith seems to get a bad rap these days. The word seems dirty and untouchable by the Satanist. For why I ask? I wake up with the "faith" that: My daughter will be safe and right where I left her before going to bed
My job is still intact when I get there.
My family members stay healthy.
The food I am eating won't kill me.
That I haven't forgotten anything at home before leaving the house.
That I won't die during some part of the day via someone running a red light and my "faith" that the little walking man telling me it's safe to walk is right.

Here we go darlings:

faith (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.


\:\)
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45289 - 12/20/10 05:05 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Faith is an interesting concept.

I think faith only transforms into knowledge through experience even when this doesn't necessarily imply this knowledge being true. All knowledge we have, which is not submitted to experience, is essentially nothing but faith. But mostly this faith is a belief in probabilities. Something is highly likely or unlikely which makes the content of a can of soup predictable.

In the end, faith matters little and it is better to be pragmatic; it's valid when it works.

D.

Top
#45297 - 12/20/10 10:22 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Draculesti Offline
Impaler
member


Registered: 09/18/07
Posts: 325
Loc: Rockville, Maryland
I agree with Diavolo, that faith can be an interesting concept. I find it more interesting, however, in that it can be dangerous, as in taking things on faith when one would be better served by doubt.

Take, for instance, your example of having faith that your daughter is still in bed where you left her. Only a fool would take it completely on faith that no one climbed in through her window to steal her away into the night (there are plenty of cases to show that this kind of thing has indeed happened before), so you check in on her periodically. If you took it absolutely on faith that she is still there, you wouldn't give it a second thought.

It seems to me that the essence of Satanism is doubt. Those who walk around in a "faith bubble" are oblivious to how flimsy their shield is against all the bad things that can and do happen. Faith can be a good thing, too, but it must be tempered by reason.
_________________________
The Holy Trinity: Me, Myself, and I.

Homo Homini Lupus

Top
#45298 - 12/20/10 10:30 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Draculesti]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
The best definition of faith that I've encountered:

faith=believing something you cannot prove.

When I buy a can of soup, I have faith in the producer (e.g. Campbells) that the label corresponds to the contents.

The interesting part comes when we truly consider how much we accept without hard and fast proof. It's a lot more than most people think . . .

JK
_________________________



Top
#45300 - 12/20/10 11:03 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The very problem with proof is that essentially it also is belief.

Of course in daily life, it matters little and I'd be a moron to question the reality of a car moving towards me, but fundamentally all proof is based upon a specific perception of reality which might be quite different from what we believe it to be.

D.

Top
#45301 - 12/20/10 11:48 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
The very problem with proof is that essentially it also is belief.


Shhhhhhh, don't tell anybody!

LOL, awesome point.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45305 - 12/20/10 12:19 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
We went into this discussion when I discussed free will with that rapper Satanist guy (can't remember his name). He claimed he didnt believe or had faith in anything which obviously cant be true for any human being.

There might be a different thing if we talk of "faith in spirits" or a "belief in God".

We have also been dicussing doubt which is a hugely interesting point to me and I have seen both the good things it can bring but also the negatives depending on how afr one takes it. Its the same with some Satanists adversarial natures. ometimes they become adversaries just to oppose. And that way they obviously are controlled jut as much as the people they try to stand up against.

Top
#45306 - 12/20/10 12:30 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
All as far as I'm concerned faith is is belief in somethin that isn't proven real. We are real and damn sure I am and my goal is to make sure my family and I get the most out of our time here. Faith I think some people need to make them feel beter and something to believe in. Hey, if that makes them feel better then so be it and I am happy for them. Me, I guess I am too realistc.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45307 - 12/20/10 01:19 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
More abstractly, in internet networking, do the characters that you entertain and converse with offer anything other than plain text to you that prove that you are real?


This it the Turing Test. Pretty soon you'll not only be unsure if they're real, you'll be unsure if they're people.

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
[...] when you go to a grocery store to buy a can of soup is it not faith that you are employing when you buy it? Not through action, but through the thought that what you are buying is actually soup. [...] You believe that there is soup in the can because every time that you have bought that soup, there has been soup. It's a mini trial and error process that we subconsciously use ALL the time.


Humans never have perfect knowledge - that's why their brains are essentially pattern-matching devices, rather than strict logic circuits (I have no evidence of that claim, but I do have faith that it's true )

To justify a particular effect as resulting from a particular cause I tend to think of the "amount" of evidence one has as a continuum ranging from "blind faith" (or zero, which is what I usually mean when I use the shorthand "faith") to "almost certain" (which usually means a history of very high correlation).

But I'm one who tries to understand and adapt my mental frameworks to be ever more useful. If one wants to use the term "faith" to be very broad, then of course everything is based on "faith" and all we can do is hope things work out. I prefer to use the term in a more narrow sense, and in your example, I wouldn't say I had faith in the soup - I would say I merely have an expectation of soup.

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
One day, you go into the grocery store and buy a can of soup. When you get home and open the can, you find that it is writhing with mold even though the date is far from it's expiration. What do you do? Obviously throw the soup away. However, how will you look at the next can of soup when you go to buy it? Will you instead opt for spaghetti os? Or, even better, will you decide to override you want for ANYTHING in a can and instead prefer something you can see outright? I, for one, would take the last and probably would not be able to trust anything in can for a LONG time.

I see people that are almost butthurt by the things that they can't see.


Ah, you should go read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

This example is a midway point between faith and understanding. It's not that people can't see, it's that they won't see. It should be easily understandable that systems are not perfect, and every once in a while you get a faulty product. There is nothing mystical here at all, and no reason to rely on blind faith rather than use your brain.

Your reaction is one of blind faith - you've lost faith in the Soup. Indeed, you've lost faith in all Canned Goods.

Throw the can out and buy another, or return it to the store and consult with the staff. Perhaps it was an isolated incident, or perhaps it works out that manufacturer's processes are not reliable and a lot of cans are bad, in which case it's a better use of your time and energy to switch to another brand or food, but don't allow blind faith to drive you.

One has the opportunity to observe, research, and understand. Some see it as a responsibility ("responsibility to the responsible"?), others as a chore. This is my main issue with conflating blind faith with understanding by using the phrase "faith". It's too easy to create some overly simplistic theory, and contort facts to fit the theory rather than change the theory to fit the facts.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#45308 - 12/20/10 01:46 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: manofsteel]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Draculesti
Take, for instance, your example of having faith that your daughter is still in bed where you left her. Only a fool would take it completely on faith that no one climbed in through her window to steal her away into the night (there are plenty of cases to show that this kind of thing has indeed happened before), so you check in on her periodically. If you took it absolutely on faith that she is still there, you wouldn't give it a second thought.


Good point. Although, once you have gone to bed and are fast asleep, it is with the faith that you've checked the window locks and they stay secure. Or that the locks on your doors are secure. Or even that she stays in the same room as you also reside. It is really up to the trappings of where my daughter lays her head at night. Is the faith that she is going to still be there in the morning when I wake up stronger if she happens to be asleep right next to me? Surely, it is. However, more horrible things have happened to children so what is it exactly that makes me NOT stay up all night wondering if she is still in bed. (Something my mother does constantly, even when I was in my teenage years.) I call it faith.

Imagine how paranoid you would have to be if you constantly had to wander in and out of your child's bedroom at all hours of the night. How would you function in order to be a good parent? There are points in time where we let ourselves forget about what is going on outside our internal worlds. The truth of kidnapping is always out there but we take steps to make sure that it doesn't happen to ours.

What's interesting about this situation is, that doubt plays an excellent role in, at least this particular situation, faith. I doubt the outside world. Anything past my internal world, I cannot fully trust. With this doubt that I hold for a good portion of the outside of my internal world, I take the steps that are needed to protect my daughter from it. Such as the locks on the doors or windows, crossing the street to her school with her or even checking her candy before she eats it from Halloween. Seems to me that doubt is more faith's friend when viewed from that aspect.

Doubt is in the mini trial and error process I wrote about in the OP. Primarily using my daughter for example.. I doubt that if I wake her up 15 minutes before she has to be at school, she will get there in time. Why? She, being my second, can be grouchy and very hard to wake up. The reason I mentioned she is my second child is because that also plays a role in how I can have faith that my 4 year old is going to act much like her older brother when being woken up. Therefore, through my doubt of her getting up with no problem and previous experiences, I can have faith that getting her up sooner than 15 minutes before the school bell rings is a more proper thing to do.

Which brings me to another very good point:

 Originally Posted By: Draculesti
Faith can be a good thing, too, but it must be tempered by reason.


Of course. Why do something without having any reason? In the real world, where real problems abound, we use logic or reason to bat our way through the cornfields of life. We must justify why we have such faiths and consistency often serves as that justification. As with the soup can; "I've bought this soup several times and it has never failed to be soup". In the end, it's consistency of the soup that gives us that faith to pick it up and buy it. It is also the use of logic: "If the can says soup and I've never gotten anything other than soup; it must be soup". So on and so forth.


 Originally Posted By: Jason King
faith=believing something you cannot prove.


Great. I love it. This makes faith not ethereal at all. When religion is forced onto the word faith, little logic and sense is used.

If you cannot see through the blinds of my daughter's windows; you cannot prove that she is actually there. As a kidnapper, even, you take the logical approach with the thought of consistency: "She's always in that room as far as I've observed". The flaw in it may be huge as maybe she is at her grandmother's for the night and gets caught climbing in that window because his target was not there. His logic of her "always" being in that room has misguided his faith and now he's in quite the pickle! Merely an example of how consistency cannot always justify faith.

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
The interesting part comes when we truly consider how much we accept without hard and fast proof. It's a lot more than most people think . . .


This is something I quite agree with. Does this mean our thinking is faulty? Not necessarily. There are many reasons why we could choose to accept things as they are or believe them without needing hard proven evidence.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
...but fundamentally all proof is based upon a specific perception of reality which might be quite different from what we believe it to be.


This is a great observation. Not everyone sees things the same way as the next person and even with our adept senses; they are even prone to mistake.

When I was in grade school as a part of a Halloween party, we were blind folded and told to reach our hands into several bowls of unnamed substances. (Just wanted to point out the faith that we had to have to be able to realize that being blindfolded and putting out hands into bowls that they didn't know what they contained wasn't an attempt on our teachers part to harm us. \:\) ) Back on topic though, some of us guessed that there were certain things were the same but there were a few things that guesses of what it was were either way off or completely different that what the other student perceived it to be.

Does this boil down to personal experience? (IE A person may be able to determine something better because, in this situation, they've touched the unnamed substance before unlike the classmate behind them.)


 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
He claimed he didnt believe or had faith in anything which obviously cant be true for any human being.


This is true but faith is something that is used after one has logically processed the available information. It is employed only after the mini trial and error processes that we go through everyday to shape our own internal world.

 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
There might be a different thing if we talk of "faith in spirits" or a "belief in God".


Also, very true. I think that religion has tainted the word faith making much more stigma than there needs to be. Faith is often placed in the hands of spirituality and the belief in mind numbing religion. As a Satanist, the word faith does not play a role as a religious term or at least it shouldn't. Faith should be something that is used as a tool via our own observations.


 Originally Posted By: TheInsane

We have also been dicussing doubt which is a hugely interesting point to me


I will check your thread out as the relation between faith and doubt has become quite the curious idea for me. I think I would benefit from such a thread. With my readings and such, I haven't had much time though. Thank you for referring to the thread though.

 Originally Posted By: ManofSteel
Faith I think some people need to make them feel beter and something to believe in. Hey, if that makes them feel better then so be it and I am happy for them. Me, I guess I am too realistc.


This is what I mean by the word faith being tainted by church and the drones that continuously use the word faith in the spiritual deity ridden sense. You said that you essentially believe that faith is belief in something you can't see. What I am trying to point out, there are a lot of things out there we can't see but doesn't make them any less real. You cannot physically see me yet here I am typing this response to you on a very real website as a very real person. How can you prove this other than the text that is offered? You cannot. You have never actually seen me, therefore, am I really the same person that you may have conversed with in my other threads or am I someone else? Did someone hack my account? While the obvious answer to this is "no", you are receiving that confirmation from me. AKA the person you cannot see. So, it is with faith that you take into account that I am a real person on this forum and not another taking my place.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45310 - 12/20/10 02:14 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
This it the Turing Test. Pretty soon you'll not only be unsure if they're real, you'll be unsure if they're people.


Ah, I wouldn't go so far. I actually addressed that somewhat in my previous response post. (Which, unfortunately, I didn't refresh to see anyone else that may have responding while I was typing so I missed yours.) As Satanists, we are the type to question EVERYTHING and even when, after a couple tests, the results are the same; we question it still. Thus my expression of throwing basketballs against the wall in the OP.

The way I addressed it was via checking in on my daughter because of having doubt that she may or may not be there in the morning. There is a certain element to faith and questioning certain faiths that we have that some might turn into paranoia. (IE the example if I spent all night going up and down the stairs checking on my daughter and constantly doubting that I was right; losing sleep and being a less functioning adult due to that doubt. Doubt turning to paranoia. In the form of my mother (also used as an example previously), she checks on the children constantly due to paranoia and not doubt.)

This perfect when describing something healthy as doubt turning into something unhealthy.

 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
To justify a particular effect as resulting from a particular cause I tend to think of the "amount" of evidence one has as a continuum ranging from "blind faith" (or zero, which is what I usually mean when I use the shorthand "faith") to "almost certain" (which usually means a history of very high correlation).


I love how you bring up the broad usage of faith. Of course, this bandwidth, so to speak of faith and it's uses switches within each internal world.

Xtains believe without a doubt that they have felt the presence of christ in their lives; placing their faith in their lord and christ in the polar opposite of absolute certainty where we, as Satanists would place their faith.

The subjectivity of faith, especially in religion is somewhat intriguing because of the different perspectives of those around us. I value my ability to entertain the stories that are told and use it as a learning tool about the religion itself and the person that holds that belief dear to them. Religion is toxic on the language and people but understanding a religion and the people that practice faith through their religion certainly makes for a good project on learning more about the internal human psyche and how it works/ projects itself in such a world.

 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
in your example, I wouldn't say I had faith in the soup - I would say I merely have an expectation of soup.


I will say this..

I, through my own personal experiences in the past, expect that there is soup in that can therefore, I am going to buy that can of soup.

I, through my own personal experiences in the past, hold the faith/belief that there is soup in that can therefore, I am going to buy that can of soup.

 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
Ah, you should go read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.


So much reading! LOL I have heard good things on this book, I will add it to my list of books to read. Thanks for the suggestion. \:\)

 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
There is nothing mystical here at all, and no reason to rely on blind faith rather than use your brain.

Your reaction is one of blind faith - you've lost faith in the Soup. Indeed, you've lost faith in all Canned Goods.


That is what I am trying to drop when it comes to the word faith. The religious aspect to it. Yes, it is broad to do so but if faith's basic definition or understanding = belief in something you cannot prove, then it is safe to assume that outside the religious belief (which has no practical use in Satanism) faith IS said broad term.

 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
It's too easy to create some overly simplistic theory, and contort facts to fit the theory rather than change the theory to fit the facts.


I concur and while I can be accused of doing so with some things.. unless you drop the religious trappings of the word faith, the usage of it will always catch the eye because of the stigma behind it. There are several definitions of the word faith. The one that I quoted here in the OP best fits my idea of the word. Dropping the religious background and tainting makes the word much clearer in use.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45312 - 12/20/10 03:06 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Haven't read the replies, but the OP fails because it draws on the fallacy of equivocation. A favoured tactic of those that would legitimize faith, equivocation is simply drawing on multiple definitions of the same word, and interchanging them as is convenient.

Trust that an outcome will come about based on sound evidence, ie this action has always yielded this result in the past, (the thousands of cans of soup I have bought have always been soup) is not the same thing as coming to a conclusion that has not shown itself to be reliable. (faith in a deity that has never been observed to exist)

Apples and oranges.

Religious faith, as invoked by believers is antithesis to LHP philosophy because once you can form a belief in one thing without requiring evidence, you can believe ANYTHING based on the same information (none). From here you can fall for about anything.

Faith, in this context, is intellectual suicide.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45313 - 12/20/10 03:44 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Mr. Dread,

I do urge you to read the responses however, I see where you are coming from but still disagree with you. The fact that the word faith has many definitions (in the dictionary, not in other people's heads) DOES in fact mean that I can take what definition I feel fits my idea of faith. Which I did, in the original post. I also urge you to drop the mysticism that comes with the word faith.

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Trust that an outcome will come about based on sound evidence


Trial and error, scientific method and observed occurrences, yes. Thus the idea of:

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
(the thousands of cans of soup I have bought have always been soup)


******

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
is not the same thing as coming to a conclusion that has not shown itself to be reliable. (faith in a deity that has never been observed to exist)


No, it's not. However, that opinion changes with every individual you meet. This was also covered in my responses to Autodidact. The broad spectrum of faith = believing something that you cannot prove, is very different for everyone.

It has been suggested on this thread that proof = belief and that faith also = belief. Consistency + Proof = Belief/Faith/Expectation of the same outcome?


 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
but the OP fails because it draws on the fallacy of equivocation. A favoured tactic of those that would legitimize faith


Again, I have to disagree with you. Mainly because the I believe that certain words like "faith" are tainted for others and people avoid them simply because of the symbolism behind them for OTHERS. I am breaking down this tainted word because I believe that the only way that you can get over the stigma of the word is if you really see as to why it's being avoided.

Anton himself said that Satanists avoid using words such as "faith" or "hope". Why? Is it because we are cutting words out and using them the way that christians do? Why do we allow such limitations on our language and how we express ourselves? Should I possess myself to tear out pages of the dictionary that one facet of humanity overuses?

Dan, religion has no place in Satanism. Therefore, it is only logical for me, as a Satanist, to use faith in what I deem to be the RIGHT context. Which is what is posted in the original post.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45314 - 12/20/10 04:03 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
The RIGHT context? The word faith is colloquially defined as 'belief without(or in spite of) evidence'.

Faith as per religious faith and faith as per trust in an outcome are different uses for the same word. Muddling them will get you exactly nowhere, and is a prime example of the logical fallacy of Equivocation. You can disagree all you like, but this isn't a matter of opinion but of fact.

Using the word faith when what you actually mean is trust will only serve to make your written communication even LESS clear than it already is(which is no small feat, no offence). I have to ask, what is it you are trying to accomplish with this? Do you not like to be understood when you post?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45315 - 12/20/10 04:06 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The question about faith or knowledge is, fundamentally, a question about truth.

The very problem most people have with truth is that they desire it to be true all the time. They need something to hold on to, a beacon to trust upon. Some find their truth in religion, mysticism or even science. They need something that can solve their answers, a savior that can show them the light, define their direction and provide their ideas. Even amongst many scientific minded, science has become Scientism, elevated to an almost godly status, where, one day, it will provide all the answers to everything, even when science, essentially, provides no answers at all; it only provides data.

What most people forget is that truth is a matter of perspective and while something can be true in one perspective, it doesn't necessarily need to be true in another. When perspectives change, truth changes. As such, truth is not terribly important. What is much more important is what works. We can easily call religious people ignorant, or morons, but what we can't deny is that it works for them. And the moment it stops working, their perspectives will change and they'll discover new truths.

As such, any question or answer about faith, knowledge or truth is dependent upon a specific perspective.

D.

Top
#45316 - 12/20/10 04:13 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
The RIGHT context? The word faith is colloquially defined as 'belief without(or in spite of) evidence'.

Faith as per religious faith and faith as per trust in an outcome are different uses for the same word. Muddling them will get you exactly nowhere, and is a prime example of the logical fallacy of Equivocation. You can disagree all you like, but this isn't a matter of opinion but of fact.

Using the word faith when what you actually mean is trust will only serve to make your written communication even LESS clear than it already is(which is no small feat, no offence). I have to ask, what is it you are trying to accomplish with this? Do you not like to be understood when you post?


Yes, the right context, Dan. See, when I use the definition that I see fit for the word "faith" it is clear. Therefore, there is no Equivocation. The original post makes it very clear about what I view the word faith to mean.

Using the word trust would be a fallacy on my part for this post. I am using the correct terminology for what I was writing. What a person takes from the post is subjective to their own views on what faith means. Which dictionary definition did you choose, Mr. Dread?

Which brings me to another interesting thing that was brought to my attention. Words that seem to mean the same thing. Surely saying that I have faith in something and I trust something sounds the same.

I have faith that my boyfriend is faithful to me in our relationship. Why is that so because I trust him.

You see here with a little more digging, there is indeed a difference between the faith and trust correlation that you have suggested.

Oh and by the way, no offense taken, Mr. Dread. I always appreciate constructive criticism.. even if it doesn't change my opinion it is still useful to have on hand from time to time.


Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (12/20/10 04:16 PM)
Edit Reason: adding.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45317 - 12/20/10 04:17 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Sure, we operate on a scale of probability for all knowledge. Nothing is 100% 'proven', in fact for anything to qualify as actual knowledge it must be falsifiable.

With that said, many beliefs are not, and many have no grounding in empirical reality whatsoever. Using language games to equivocate the concepts of justified true belief with things that you wish to be true is nothing less than disingenuous.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45318 - 12/20/10 04:25 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic

You see here with a little more digging, there is indeed a difference between the faith and trust correlation that you have suggested.

Not really.

 Quote:

I have faith that my boyfriend is faithful to me in our relationship. Why is that so because I trust him.

is interchangeable with

 Quote:

I trust my boyfriend is faithful to me in our relationship. Why is that so because I have faith in him.


Using the word faith here at all only serves to muddle the clarity of what you are trying to convey. Faith and trust are exact synonyms here. Again I ask, what is the point? Is there some sort of message you are trying to get across?

It seems to me you are trying to justify 'spiritual' hokey pokey through language games.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45320 - 12/20/10 04:29 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Using language games to equivocate the concepts of justified true belief with things that you wish to be true is nothing less than disingenuous.


Am I the one playing language games? Perhaps I have not made myself clear enough.

Faith has it's own meaning to everyone. Much like that of the word spirituality but let's not re-open THAT can of worms again.

I derived what I deem to be the meaning of faith from the dictionary which lists several meanings. As I see it, religious talk is not a part of Satanism, therefore why would I use a word in a religious context?

Christians use faith as a term to justify their belief in some cosmic deity floating around in another dimension. If I do not partake in such delusions of the mind, why would I opt for THEIR version of faith?

Why do Satanists (surely, I am not speaking for all when I write this) use the term faith in the way that christians would? Especially Satanists that claim that they are atheistic in nature? Why do we let them own those words?

If we can take on the label Satanist and the adversary, can't we take back words that do not necessarily correlate to anything that IS christian?

Would it be more adversarial to question their judgment in the word of faith and use it for it's more practical definition than for their big guy in the sky?
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45321 - 12/20/10 04:30 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic

Dan, religion has no place in Satanism.


Are you sure about this?

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
Therefore, it is only logical for me, as a Satanist, to use faith in what I deem to be the RIGHT context. Which is what is posted in the original post.


Can you distill your definition down to a few sentences? I don't have the energy and/or inclination to try to unwind that huge ball of yarn up there.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#45322 - 12/20/10 04:31 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Hiya Org,

Generally faith is for the suckers, for the rubes.

look at shit like an ole time carnie looks at shit. The only time faith is any good is when you can use it to get others to do what you want.

Try and minimise the amount of faith you have in anything. Be a calculating thing, its much more fun.

Top
#45323 - 12/20/10 04:34 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Spiritual hokey pokey? LOL!

By this am I to assume that you think I am trying to validate any kind of spirituality? You are missing it aren't you?

This is not about the justification of spiritual religions or even religion per say. It's about taking a definition of a word and making that word something that I can use without the tainted view point of any religion.

Why in the world would I want to justify spiritual anything? I am addressing language, yes. That much you've gotten with me. It seems to me by the responses that I have gotten before you that they seem to have an idea of what I am speaking of. What is so hard to understand? Did you read the replies between other members and I?
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45324 - 12/20/10 04:37 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Fnord]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Seriously. Faith is the only word in our language that defines the concept of 'belief without evidence'. So your point here is you wish to start using that word to mean trust, for no other reason than (?).

Pointless..

Carry on.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45326 - 12/20/10 04:42 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic

Dan, religion has no place in Satanism.


Are you sure about this?


Okay, I will rephrase that last sentence.. Religion has no place in Satanism for ME.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord

Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
Therefore, it is only logical for me, as a Satanist, to use faith in what I deem to be the RIGHT context. Which is what is posted in the original post.


Can you distill your definition down to a few sentences? I don't have the energy and/or inclination to try to unwind that huge ball of yarn up there.


Sure.

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
faith (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.


or

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
faith=believing something you cannot prove.


Thus:

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
I do not withhold my beliefs in which I do not believe that there is a physical god or devil. I have never believed in heaven or hell since my own understanding of faith and religion. However, I do think that there is some merit in being able to come to peace with the idealism of "faith". You take steps in "faith" everyday. You go to bed with the idea, the "faith", that you will wake up the next day. You go to work everyday with the "faith" that you will still have it when you get there. Since when did "faith" have to hand in hand with "spirituality"?


and..

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
That is what I am trying to drop when it comes to the word faith. The religious aspect to it. Yes, it is broad to do so but if faith's basic definition or understanding = belief in something you cannot prove, then it is safe to assume that outside the religious belief (which has no practical use in Satanism) faith IS said broad term.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45328 - 12/20/10 04:45 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Sure, we operate on a scale of probability for all knowledge. Nothing is 100% 'proven', in fact for anything to qualify as actual knowledge it must be falsifiable.

With that said, many beliefs are not, and many have no grounding in empirical reality whatsoever. Using language games to equivocate the concepts of justified true belief with things that you wish to be true is nothing less than disingenuous.


Of course many beliefs fail in a scientific perspective, simply because they can't be proven, or no real data can be gathered, but all it says is that in that perspective it isn't true and that this knowledge they claim to have can be classified as faith.

We call knowledge faith that can be verified in a specific perspective. But fundamentally it remains faith.

Of course, considering everything faith and constantly doubting the truth isn't very practical in real life.

D.

Top
#45329 - 12/20/10 04:48 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Seriously Dan? Did I ever mention how much I really like your sig? You've quoted it to me many times. I still like it every time I read it.

 Originally Posted By: Dictionary.com
faith
   /feɪθ/ Show Spelled[feyth] Show IPA
–noun
1.
confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.
belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.
belief in god or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.
belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.
a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.
the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.
the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.
Christian Theology . the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.


Really. I just did that. Ugh.

But with that being posted. Can you please explain to me why I have to use the word faith wrapped up in the "baby jesus'" blankets instead of taking what I deem the more Satanist way of using one's language and adapt the definition that best suits me the way I see it fit?

Or do I have to conform to the christian view of things to get understood?
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45331 - 12/20/10 04:51 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
faith (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.


OK

and...

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
faith=believing something you cannot prove.

OK

So...

 Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic
That is what I am trying to drop when it comes to the word faith. The religious aspect to it.


Neither definition mentions religion specifically. Only you did that.

So WTF is the argument about again?

Strunk & Wagnall's:
"Omit Needless Words."
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#45333 - 12/20/10 04:56 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Language is only useful insofar as it facilitates clear communication of ideas. Your whole point here is what? Taking the word back? Then what word would you suggest we use to describe belief without evidence?

Pointing to my sig was a nice attempt at a passive aggressive insult, but I assure you even though you say in 100 words what others can say in a sentence, I am still following you. It's just that your general thesis here is useless, and further it is counterproductive on a few levels.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45334 - 12/20/10 05:00 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo


Of course, considering everything faith and constantly doubting the truth isn't very practical in real life.

D.


Wait, I thought trust and faith were the same thing. Is that not what Dan said? They were the same? I might be mistaken but assuming that I am playing with the language and then playing with the language itself in order to get one's point across to another...

Let's not forget what Aklo dropped..

 Originally Posted By: Aklo
If you say so? But if so, there's a huge problem. You see, words have meaning. They don't just mean whatever we want, not without a lot of work at least.


I have listed the definitions of the word faith and still you continue to tell me that I am playing the word game. I am merely taking back a word that was made dirtied by religion and using it in what I deem is the appropriate context to myself.

This post was not meant to change anyone's minds. It was to challenge that idea that certain words have stigmas behind them and therefore are not used because of those stigmas. Also, to question ourselves as to where these specific stigmas came from.. did they come from ourselves or did they come from the well ingrained christain society? Expanding on the use of a word without changing the actual definition of the word is the challenge. Dropping the religious ties and taking the word for what it's worth to you.

Besides that, the only way to be completely clear about things is to thoroughly explain yourself.

Trust and faith, are NOT the same word and each have their own meanings. We can't slap a different meaning onto another word because it "sounds" right. We can, however, take a word for it's definition and use it as such.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45336 - 12/20/10 05:02 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
faith=trust

faith=belief without evidence

Two separate definitions for the same word. This isn't rocket science.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45337 - 12/20/10 05:06 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Language is only useful insofar as it facilitates clear communication of ideas. Your whole point here is what? Taking the word back? Then what word would you suggest we use to describe belief without evidence?

Pointing to my sig was a nice attempt at a passive aggressive insult, but I assure you even though you say in 100 words what others can say in a sentence, I am still following you. It's just that your general thesis here is useless, and further it is counterproductive on a few levels.



I don't deem that to be an insult at all. Many see you as a very straight forward kind of person. Who else would I want to point out inconsistencies of my threads than you? (This is also not meant to be a snide remark.)

The only problem here, that I am seeing of course, that you are not pointing out inconsistencies. You are merely saying "no, you are wrong because this is what this word means and THAT word is really what you meant to use".
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45339 - 12/20/10 05:10 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Fnord]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: Fnord

So WTF is the argument about again?


The argument (well, my comment, really) is that the OP wants to purposefully use a word that has multiple meanings in a number of contexts (including this thread) where other words / concepts would be a better fit.

Each of us is clearly free to use whatever words we want to mean whatever we want. Unfortunately, as this thread has shown, there are (at least) two consequences of this:

Language is a means of communication because people share their understanding of what various words mean. If definitions are not shared, confusion results. Using the word "faith" in this forum and not imply spirituality causes confusion in those who normally make the association.

Second, the definition does not work. Clearly, one can prove Soup by opening the can.

That being said, you are all perfectly free to use whatever words you want
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#45340 - 12/20/10 05:10 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Really?

trust
- 6 dictionary results
trust
   /trʌst/ Show Spelled[truhst] Show IPA
–noun
1.
reliance on the integrity, strength, ability, surety, etc., of a person or thing; confidence.
2.
confident expectation of something; hope.
3.
confidence in the certainty of future payment for property or goods received; credit: to sell merchandise on trust.
4.
a person on whom or thing on which one relies: God is my trust.
5.
the condition of one to whom something has been entrusted.
6.
the obligation or responsibility imposed on a person in whom confidence or authority is placed: a position of trust.
7.
charge, custody, or care: to leave valuables in someone's trust.
8.
something committed or entrusted to one's care for use or safekeeping, as an office, duty, or the like; responsibility; charge.
9.
Law .
a.
a fiduciary relationship in which one person (the trustee) holds the title to property (the trust estate or trust property) for the benefit of another (the beneficiary).
b.
the property or funds so held.
10.
Commerce .
a.
an illegal combination of industrial or commercial companies in which the stock of the constituent companies is controlled by a central board of trustees, thus making it possible to manage the companies so as to minimize production costs, control prices, eliminate competition, etc.
b.
any large industrial or commercial corporation or combination having a monopolistic or semimonopolistic control over the production of some commodity or service.
11.
Archaic . reliability.

Can we stop with the semantics here and get back to the topic?
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45341 - 12/20/10 05:13 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Autodidact]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
 Originally Posted By: Fnord

So WTF is the argument about again?


The argument (well, my comment, really) is that the OP wants to purposefully use a word that has multiple meanings in a number of contexts (including this thread) where other words / concepts would be a better fit.

Each of us is clearly free to use whatever words we want to mean whatever we want. Unfortunately, as this thread has shown, there are (at least) two consequences of this:

Language is a means of communication because people share their understanding of what various words mean. If definitions are not shared, confusion results. Using the word "faith" in this forum and not imply spirituality causes confusion in those who normally make the association.

Second, the definition does not work. Clearly, one can prove Soup by opening the can.

That being said, you are all perfectly free to use whatever words you want


Which is why I clearly stated in the original post how I was using the word faith as to clear up the confusion and the semantic battle ensues even through this. Words are subjective to their users. Confusion can arise any time with any thing. There is nothing wrong with using a word within your own definition as long as you make yourself clear that is how you are using the word. Which I, in fact did, through example and definition.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45342 - 12/20/10 05:19 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: orgasmic

You are merely saying "no, you are wrong because this is what this word means and THAT word is really what you meant to use".

No that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying your thesis is completely pointless. Using a word that is commonly defined one way to mean something else that is better described by a less nebulous word (trust) is an effort in obfuscation.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45343 - 12/20/10 05:23 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
 Originally Posted By: orgasmic

You are merely saying "no, you are wrong because this is what this word means and THAT word is really what you meant to use".

No that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying your thesis is completely pointless. Using a word that is commonly defined one way to mean something else that is better described by a less nebulous word (trust) is an effort in obfuscation.



So I would make better to use a word that doesn't mean the same thing for me that it does for you? Isn't that kind of hypocritical to suggest when you are in fact suggesting that I am using something out of context via your context of the word?



Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (12/20/10 05:25 PM)
Edit Reason: unneeded edit
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45345 - 12/20/10 05:34 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
LOL what?

What word doesn't mean the same thing to us both? words have definitions, people that agree on a definition can use that word to communicate information.

What is hypocritical about my pointing to the fact that faith is the word used to describe the phenomenon of believing something without evidence? That if you choose to start ignoring this people aren't going to know wtf you are talking about unless you first point out that you actually mean trust?

Anyway, I have said the same thing in ten different ways and I am not going to bother with number 11. If you want to dull the edge on the tool that is language, you go right ahead.

Me, I'll continue to use it in a way that conveys information in a more direct fashion.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45349 - 12/20/10 06:09 PM Faith and Satanisms [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
@O.K.:
as i use the term 'Satanism' it is a single ideology and not an umbrella term. I reserve that categorical distinction for 'Satanity' because it makes more sense to me. so many religious paradigms consent to fly under a banner presented to them by Christian culture as if they are singular ideologies that i am not pleased to accept this standard of engagement or description. pluraled, yes. Satanisms are too individually-centered to pretend they have a contiguous inherence. your supposition that all Satanisms are ideologically-based and suppose their own accuracy is myopic, by my understanding, though it probably describes the bulk of those who have escaped the Christian Church. once one accepts the individual basis of all dimensions of a Satanism's construction, then every aspect of spirituality and religion achieves that 'playground' aspect to which you referred.

if you observe internet stratification you will see, i think, an hierarchic distribution of attention generally paid to featured and recorded media in combination with the visual (emphasized), sound (secondary), and text (tertiary) preferences afforded to TV. these often make possible an ignoring of what we do not like, but only successful moderation prevents our observation of what remains in the wake of the object of that filtration (i.e. even though we may ignore an irritating person we will continue to see the irritation of others who do not properly utilize the ignore features until the irritant reforms or is excluded from participation). I leave as academic and unimportant the determinations as to their 'reality'. your mention of getting them on cam to determine their reality is disputed by various chat-moderators in heavily restricted zones where they must ask the individual to reply and mimic their gestures. take that mouldy can back to the store and ask for a refund. consider not returning to that soup distribution center.

when it comes to a consideration of the term 'faith', as you and others have commented on it, there are several possible meanings for it, some of them applying to religious activities and some more secular or conventional. The King and others have applied the anti-theist significance of greatest objection to the term when defining it as believing what you cannot rationally demonstrate (my words). it amounts to trust in religious authorities regarding unseen forces, afterlives, and cosmologies. it is this significance which achieves the greatest opposition by Satanists and rationalists the world over. comparably, you choose to emphasize the following: "Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing." as such, this is consonant with the wide variety of applications within religion, and its most objectionable noun is a doctrinarian cult that requires us to 'take on faith' what we cannot ever confirm in our experience or by rational processes. the ordinary trust issues you bring up in reply to such criticism seem of a different character and, while they may play into a general epistemological analysis of reductionism, they are ultimately unimportant to most Satanists (because as rationalists we can agree about them).

amongst some observations on psychology and religion, you contend that "faith is something that is used after one has logically processed the available information". this is utopian and unrealistic in the extreme, especially where religious contexts are concerned. you say that you want to drop the religious aspects of it, and as such it quickly loses its objectionable significances, becoming 'trust' and 'allegiance' to ordinary and conventional things instead. you suggest also dropping the "mysticism" that comes with this word, and, while for you and the Satanists you run with this may prove to be valuable for you, i suggest that the cost of tossing that Bathwater may be very high.

in an examination of the term 'faith's religious significance (which is all that matters to me in a critique of it - the other trust/allegiance issues about whether Schroedinger's Cat is in the box, whether i will wake up tomorrow, whether Sol will rise, whether my friend will come to my aid, are useless to me), due to the transphysical contentions of religious which they adhere to the term, it largely is a matter of personal experience, yes. those who feel that they can somehow employ a methodology of ascertainment interior to their experience do so and thereby rest upon the type of knowledge that this generates.

in your posts you explain what i regard as your Satanism, in a manner that i explain as RHP (exporting its authority so as to generalize). I suggest to all Satanists that you don't bother doing this if you want to be taken seriously by those who disagree with your methods. ;\) the Method of Religion as it comes to rest and be employed in Satanity will generally begin to include more faith-based suppositions. it has from the start, and in a variety of doctrines and dogmas since its inception numerous ridiculous things have been supposed "essential" or "axiomatic" to it, despite the emphasis placed on individualism. your contention that "religion has no place in Satanism" is very humorous, hopeful, and futile from what i can see. insofar as your spirituality remains solitary, you may preserve yourself from cultic dynamics.

as time wears on and more about the Satanic is relegated to disclosures about the past, it will simply be impossible to endlessly doubt everything absent a severe disconnect from reliable historical records and a complete re-invention of the Satanic Wheel. in fact, in order to feel that one makes any progress at all, a suspension of that doubt must in fact take place. how it does so and what one allows to stand unchallenged by further doubt will vary for each Satanist. doubt does indeed have a featured and prominent place, from the de facto Doubt-Goat of Crowley through the emphasis on it in LaVey and beyond. it might be exascerbated to the posture of extreme nihilism should the Satanist seek to pursue such folly.

your linguistic equations, while possibly a reflection of what is asserted, make no sense to me. proof is best understood as a testing application to an hypothesis, only the simple believing that it somehow ratifies. as implied above, the reason it is being avoided by Satanists is because of the way that it is used as a means of shutting down the mind in some religious contexts ('faiths'). one is required to suspend rational thought and accept the creed. to the rationalist this is anathema, and many Satanists are rationalists (as well as being anti-Christian or at least anti-doctrinarian in our preferences).

if you want to 'reclaim' the term faith and employ it in novel ways within Satanism that's fine. I suggest to you that numerous Satanists of spiritual and theistic character have been and will continue to employ it to relate dogmas which they have concluded are realistic and often require it of their faithful adherents to their creeds. this is the Way of Religion, and seems always to have been so. they rationalise the use of this method either by pragmatism or in the throes of their arrogance thinking they are helping their converts. I suggest that, instead of tearing out pages from your dictionary you simply get a better one. so many of them have been written by Christians that i no longer find many of them valuable. construct your own lexicon from the ground up, obtain an online dictionary and restructure to fit your need. dictionaries aren't Bibles, though ought to reflect societal usage and, in a personal library, one's own preferences of term meaning.
_________________________
.o.Making friends is amongst the finest skills which we may master.o.

.o.I will support you.o.


Edited by nocTifer (12/20/10 06:25 PM)
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#45350 - 12/20/10 06:17 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Just a point of order here that I'm sorry, but goes back to the idea of faith and soup...

When you go to the store to buy soup and (surprise!) you get soup, it isn't faith, it's simply presumptive expectation. You've gone to the store and gotten soup before. In fact, you are 99 years old, and have gone to the store every day and gotten soup when you bought the can marked "soup." Now, whenever you go to the store, your mind is conditioned to expect that there will be soup. Your natural reaction to personal experience is to presume that since this is the way it always HAS been, this is the way it always WILL be.

And in 99.999999999 percent of the time, your presumptive expectation will be right. However, through no part of your own, yet through direct human interactions with the product, anomalies in your ALMOST quantifiable presumptive expectation might find (because it happens)...

Labels might have been loosened in shipping or in storage. While can usually are coded, inexperience or laziness on the behalf of an overworked and underpaid stock clerk might see him attach the soup label to the can of Leseur Peas and vice versa.

A caselot of Vevco Spaghetti (I worked there as a young kid... thanks, Mr. Viviano!) becomes Vevco Minestrone Soup when an inexperienced puncher loads the wrong labels into the automatic labeler at the packing station and before the mistake is caught 200 cases are loaded onto a semi truck full of spaghetti. The puncher may be new, but he's nobody's fool. He's not going to tell the boss he made a mistake, stop the line and go digging through 2000 cases of spaghetti already loaded on a truck... he wants to keep his job, so the anomaly goes through.

A goof off canner decides to slip a lizard into a soup can and use it as a practical joke to scare his mother. Unfortunately, I (I mean HE... It wasn't me) forgets to mark the can and it simply becomes one of thousands on the packing line.

These are some instances of disruption to the presumptive expectation that could cause one to "lose faith" in the math of expectancy. This would not be a failure of belief or faith, simply an anomaly in expectation based on historically accurate presumptions.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#45352 - 12/20/10 07:21 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
And those presumptive expectations can easily be messed up.

I don't know if you remember that some put glass or needles into baby-food. Those parents that discovered it will, even when there is a 99.99% chance everything is fine, each time check to see if there isn't anything harmful in it.

Fear can easily override basic knowledge or reverse the expectations. Something which greatly aids terrorism.

D.

Top
#45355 - 12/20/10 07:58 PM Why Faith? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
I'm hoping you can better explain what your purpose in this discussion is, as you get the chance.

Last I saw you were headed off to read Redbeard, as you mention in your introduction, and other things. I was looking towards Machiavelli and then maybe De Sade or Nietzche after that, the idea was for you to see the range of freedom available to you once you give up slave morality and work on building a personal ideology in recognition of the world as it actually is. And this seems to have worked, sort of; though your choices may have been more derivative than I would have gone for, you are definitely showing signs of a "revaluation of all values."

But it seems like it may be difficult for us, still, to flash on what you are actually trying to accomplish. If you had just gotten back from MiR and you were trying to undo the tyranny of political correctness, or redefine the word "wog", it might be clearer. What do you stand to gain by doing intensive semantics with a term that has degenerated into meaning "believing things that ain't so"? Are you just trying to take their Faith away from them at a whole new symbolic level?

If so, I might be able to help. Here's the ghost of St. Paul:

 Originally Posted By: Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

I like to use this, in a more serious dispute, as a picture of the scientific method. When we have a hypothesis, we go ahead and start by believing it, even without evidence. This isn't blind stupidity though, we are doing it for a reason. Assuming it were true, what effects would we expect to see? What results would we logically obtain, under what circumstances? This is the gospel of Falsifiability. Without believing the theory, without imagining it to be true, we could never make the logical steps necessary to test it. We could never know anything about reality in a modern scientific sense, we could never have understood relativity and what it reveals about cosmology and the nature of our universe, without this method.

 Originally Posted By: Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

But we can't just stop there! We have to really test the theory, we have to do the suggested experiments, we have to be able to replicate them. If our hypothesis is true, it will stand up to the sort of scrutiny that man-made religions generally can't and won't and dare not. So in order to make it work, we have to not only believe but also disbelieve. And, it has to work, or, it's worthless.

Here's St. James in response:

 Originally Posted By: James 2:18
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

If we like our hypothesis, if we want it to be true, if we refuse to test it, and ignore the results that others get by testing it; if we argue in circles to prove we are right, without ever considering the immanent fact that in the real world, we have to be wrong, wrong, wrong, to ever be right; that is when our "faith" has degenerated into mere superstition. If it doesn't work, the experiment is over, we have to get over it, and go on, until something does.

 Originally Posted By: James 2:19
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

This sort of thing will make them hop and squeal. If coopting their terminology and using it against them is a viable goal, then I can recommend no better use of "faith" than this line of argument.

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45357 - 12/20/10 08:51 PM Re: Faith and Satanisms [Re: nocTifer]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To nocT,

I think there may be some valuable stuff in your post, but am having some trouble getting a handle on it.

Can you employ some concision so I can get more of a handle on your post.

What is Satanity?

Maybe I am a bit boring and old fashioned by thinking LaVey has set up the definition of Satanism in his works, but sheesh at least I can get some understanding of the meaning of the word.

To Org,

I have to admit I am having trouble understanding your position as well. You are in flux I think which is good though. Don't know where you will land?

Top
#45358 - 12/21/10 12:51 AM Re: Faith and Satanisms [Re: ]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
hello there MatthewJ1. conciseness? how about some quick cliff's notes?

(to O.K.)
if you want to 'reclaim' the term faith and employ it in novel ways within {your} Satanism that's fine. your linguistic equations, while possibly a reflection of what is asserted, make no sense to me. in order to feel that one makes any progress at all, a suspension of that doubt must in fact take place. insofar as your spirituality remains solitary, you may preserve yourself from cultic dynamics. it largely is a matter of personal experience, yes. you say that you want to drop the religious aspects of it, and as such it quickly loses its objectionable significances. there are several possible meanings for it, some of them applying to religious activities and some more secular or conventional. take that mouldy can back to the store and ask for a refund. consider not returning to that soup distribution center.

better? Satanity is the aggregate of all extant Satanisms. \:\)
oh, Happy Eclipsing Lunatix, and Happy Solstice, one and all.


Edited by nocTifer (12/21/10 12:59 AM)
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#45359 - 12/21/10 01:14 AM Re: Faith and Satanisms [Re: nocTifer]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Ummm yeah, by concision I mean removing unnecessary words and jargon in order to say what needs to be said while using as few words as possible. Aim for the cleanest possible syntax.

Satanity. Hmmm, maybe I am just a touch annoyed today, but:

"Satanism is the only religion which serves to encourage and enhance one’s individual preferences, so long as there is admission of those needs. Thus, one’s personal and indelible religion (the picture) is integrated into a perfect frame. It’s a celebration of individuality without hypocrisy, of solidarity without mindlessness, of objective subjectivity. There need be no deviation from these principles. They should summarily negate internecine strife and bickering. Any attempts at Satanic “reformation” should be seen for what they are: creating problems where none exist. There should be no place in any religion for reformers whose very religion is the fetish of reformation. There is even a place and title for compulsive dissidents, and if they can wear the mantle, they are welcome. They would delude themselves to be revolutionaries. In our camp, they are called “House Masochists.”
LaVey, The Feared Religion

Top
#45367 - 12/21/10 06:47 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
faith=trust

faith=belief without evidence

Two separate definitions for the same word. This isn't rocket science.


Actually they are not separate definitions. If I say I have faith that X, I am believing X to be true without proof (I'll return to your use of the word "evidence" in a separate reply). Here X is a state of affairs. If I say I have faith in X, I am believing that X will act in accord with my assumptions. Here X is a person. The latter cases are translatable into statements about states of affairs, and so are really just special cases of the former.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45368 - 12/21/10 07:23 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
Dan, the soup analogy should be taken with a grain of salt (shit, most canned soup has half the RDV of sodium in a single serving). The point behind it is that much of what we take for granted about the world (especially that which is based on past experience), is essentially based in an epistemic attitude falling short of knowledge (this would be pure rationality).

Do I have any "evidence" that the sun will come up tomorrow? No. I take it on faith. But here is where I think you miss something: faith and reason are not at opposition, unless you choose to have a faith ungrounded in rationality. When you say "evidence," you actually mean "reason" (see Hume on this), and that makes this issue a bit more three-dimensional than you would have it. Sure, some religionists have blind faith. But the best of them can defend their faith with reasoning. And epistemically, this is no separate species from your use of reason to justify your faith in cans of soup, rising suns, or any number of things.

Now I'll grant you this, their reasons are some absolute garbage, but they are still the products of rational minds, and should be treated accordingly. Even the silliest of superstitions (gotta wear my lucky socks, or my team won't win) is grounded in just the same empirical rationalism you use to buy cans of soup (i.e. "always been that way"). Is it equally justified? Hell no. But it's not apples and oranges either.

The point isn't that faith can never be silly, because it sure as fuck can be. But the fact that we all walk by faith to a certain degree is undeniable.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45378 - 12/21/10 02:47 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Hi Jason.

 Quote:

When you say "evidence," you actually mean "reason"

Well, no, I really don't though. Reason can be based on anything the reasoner finds convincing, and doesn't need to be grounded in anything empirical or even logical. Evidence is what one bases ones reasoning around, and although evidence is a matter of interpretation (billions find the bible to be evidence enough..), not all evidence, nor interpretations, are on equal grounds epistemologically speaking. When I speak of evidence I am talking about actual, measurable testable evidence, or at least sound logic, as opposed to that which some moron off the street might find convincing.

At any rate, the corpse of Ludwig Wittgenstein has probably done several revolutions in his grave over the course of this thread. Using one word to umbrella this much concept is folly, and that is my whole point here.

There is a marked distinction between rational belief and irrational belief, and lumping them together under this particular banner as of the same stuff is a favoured tactic of those that would have us accept the latter as the former. THAT is why I find this distinction critical.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45382 - 12/21/10 03:57 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
When I buy a can of soup I can reasonably expect to find soup in the can because every other time I have bought a can of soup the contents were, in fact, soup. Expecting to get soup when you buy soup is not an act of faith.

Faith is belief despite a lack of proof or "good", that is to say, rational, reason to believe. The fact the every attempt to buy soup has yielded my actual receiving of soup is a good reason to believe that my next attempt at buying soup will not be any different.

If, however, I buy a can of soup and expect to find dog food, that would be an act of faith, or maybe stupidity. There's really no difference between the two if you ask me.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#45384 - 12/21/10 04:15 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Firstly, I am going to start with NocT. Beforehand though NocTifer, I must say that I had a bit of a hard time following some of the things that you had written but I'll try to make due with that I have in my brain. \:\)


 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
as i use the term 'Satanism' it is a single ideology and not an umbrella term. I reserve that categorical distinction for 'Satanity' because it makes more sense to me.


Yes, I do believe that you have somewhat described Satanity to me once or twice before. I grasp the concept of it but at the same time as it is not something I am completely aware of I have yet to really fully come to any opinion on it.

The reason I stated that Satanism is like an umbrella term is because of the different types and outlooks of Satanism that I have been researching for the past few days. Some that I wasn't even aware of. Some wouldn't even last in a forum like 600 but they are still valuable to learn from.

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
once one accepts the individual basis of all dimensions of a Satanism's construction, then every aspect of spirituality and religion achieves that 'playground' aspect to which you referred.


Well yes, there are chains to be broken down. Not just the chains of christianity itself but personal goal driven chains that we have put on ourselves. There are many things that cause me to think the way that I do. I want to break down those barriers between me and anything that designs Satanism around a religious background. I had a post somewhere.. it was certainly not here about my difficulties accepting Satanism as a religion except for traditional or theists (because they do truly have deities and gods that they interact with). I certainly see Satanism as a way of doing and not practicing. I "employ" magic, gain from the psychodrama and yes, in my previous years dabbled with the ideals of the goddess in Wiccan senses. However, over the years, I have dropped the physical goddess, united myself with her outside force, dropped that as well, reformatted my hard drive when it comes to Wicca, dropped being an eclectic Wiccan, started studying Satanism and the paths and am currently muddling my way through them all. All of which I find fascinating but only one or two resonating to my own self.

Do I think that there needs to be a form of theism or Atheism to play on this proverbial playground? Of course not.

(Again, sorry if I am misinterpreting anything.)

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
(i.e. even though we may ignore an irritating person we will continue to see the irritation of others who do not properly utilize the ignore features until the irritant reforms or is excluded from participation)


That is very true and is seen everywhere we go. But why, I must ask, do we even need to pay attention to THAT? Why not go a step further and ignore them? You see, I have issues ignoring people, that much is clear, even if I do try to sit on the sidelines.. I do have a voice and I tend to use it quite often. Might be referred to with dismay but everyone does it as well.

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
your mention of getting them on cam to determine their reality is disputed by various chat-moderators in heavily restricted zones where they must ask the individual to reply and mimic their gestures.


Your reference to my example of not being able to see those that you are talking to CAN and HAS been disputed. However, have we not learned that such systems are faulty? There have been many cases in which the owner of an account gets tired of being "beat upon" and lends their account to another person. Granted, this is an act of trolling but again, weirder things have happened. Especially with the advent of "manycam"; you can remain anonymous behind a picture and still chat away in the chatroom without anyone knowing that is the real person behind the handle. (IE Eileen?)

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
this is utopian and unrealistic in the extreme, especially where religious contexts are concerned. you say that you want to drop the religious aspects of it, and as such it quickly loses its objectionable significances, becoming 'trust' and 'allegiance' to ordinary and conventional things instead. you suggest also dropping the "mysticism" that comes with this word, and, while for you and the Satanists you run with this may prove to be valuable for you, i suggest that the cost of tossing that Bathwater may be very high.


When I think of utopian concepts, I think a world full of peace and flowers. This is not meant to be something that causes that. I merely using a word, within it's context. There IS something to be said about understanding a person through common knowledge of what a word means and....

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
There is nothing wrong with the word as long as you are clear about the context.


Which I clearly was.

Satanists that I run with? No, I go into everything alone. I type these words alone. I come up with ideas on how to break down the christian bindings on everything in my own way; alone. The best way to do anything is to never assume that anyone has your back. If there is someone out there that does, great.. if not, at least you know that you can stand on your own two feet.

Yes, I suggested the dropping of the mysticism of the word faith because it doesn't need to be there. When the definitions are broken down for said word, it really doesn't have to be there. It seems to me that the real upsetting thing is that I am using "faith" out of it's original context. Surely, with definitions provided, I am NOT.

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
in your posts you explain what i regard as your Satanism, in a manner that i explain as RHP (exporting its authority so as to generalize). I suggest to all Satanists that you don't bother doing this if you want to be taken seriously by those who disagree with your methods


In my mind, Satanism is a very real and seriously personally thing. I am forging my way through my own journeys the way that I see fit. I do not need to be taught the way although I have looked into suggested readings from the members here and it has only opened my mind more so that I can take in more things. This post is a product of that. I am questioning terms that we use or don't use. Faith is a term that many would like so very much NOT to use because of the symbolic nature behind it. I see Satanism as a way of life; a philosophy if you will.

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
your contention that "religion has no place in Satanism" is very humorous, hopeful, and futile from what i can see. insofar as your spirituality remains solitary, you may preserve yourself from cultic dynamics.


And your ideals on "Satanity" have been found to be humorous as well. Did that stop you from forging your OWN path? Hell no it didn't and it gained much respect from me and others even throughout the ones that didn't really like it so much of you making up words to fit theories of Satanism and the like. I find it almost humorous myself that you would try to down play such a step in a direction of progression for myself. The ideas that I express are steps forward in my mind of opening myself up to new ideas and new expressions of self in spite of what those may say to me. Then again, these are my steps and you have your own opinions so who am I to say that you are wrong for finding my own things laughable? \:\)

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
in fact, in order to feel that one makes any progress at all, a suspension of that doubt must in fact take place.


Thus the "testing by fair/water".. Throw what you wish at the wall, if it comes back then it something that you might be able to work with. Sometimes things don't come out to be what they originally were thought to be. However, there are gems out in those rocks and I am going to find them.

Doubt, questioning oneself.. I do this all the time. There are things in life that must be doubted. Like I have said previously, doubt and faith seem to be pretty good friends, in my opinion. We use doubt and after doubt has expired we use faith that the consistency is right and if it somehow returns and is not right, then that doubt returns for the next round.

 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
if you want to 'reclaim' the term faith and employ it in novel ways within Satanism that's fine. I suggest to you that numerous Satanists of spiritual and theistic character have been and will continue to employ it to relate dogmas which they have concluded are realistic and often require it of their faithful adherents to their creeds.


I must have said this about half a dozen times but I respect you still and I will repeat myself. This was not meant to CHANGE anyone's perspectives on how they use the word faith but to explain why I would deem it, for myself and myself alone, to be used out of the religious trappings and without the stigma of a deity. That is all. Nothing more, nothing less.


 Originally Posted By: NocTifer
I suggest that, instead of tearing out pages from your dictionary you simply get a better one. so many of them have been written by Christians that i no longer find many of them valuable. construct your own lexicon from the ground up, obtain an online dictionary and restructure to fit your need.


Which I have been doing. Starting with the word faith. There shouldn't be too much a semantic battle over this but I stand up for me and my right to do so. If I use it without the attached dogmas, I will be sure to be clear about it. I know that the current audience is not set to accept such words out of a christian context but at the same time, I will do my best to clear it up for them..
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45387 - 12/21/10 04:50 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Now dear Aklo (I was wondering when you would come around. \:\) Not meant in an asshole kind of way.)

 Originally Posted By: Aklo
Last I saw you were headed off to read Redbeard, as you mention in your introduction, and other things. I was looking towards Machiavelli and then maybe De Sade or Nietzche after that, the idea was for you to see the range of freedom available to you once you give up slave morality and work on building a personal ideology in recognition of the world as it actually is. And this seems to have worked, sort of; though your choices may have been more derivative than I would have gone for, you are definitely showing signs of a "revaluation of all values."


I do tend to dive deeply. English is a passion of mine, this actually started out as a mindless ramble on my part and then it turned into something that I wanted to see play out. I knew there would a resistance but onward..

Yes, I was off to read Might is Right and I am actually in the processes of writing about certain parts but that will come as I get the right words for it so it is understood. My journey through MIR possessed me to do more research and I covered a lot of different grounds. I am not done with this obviously but I took a reading break to celebrate Pup's birthday last night. \:\) I have read some Neitchze but I would like to read more of it as I get time. (Book list gets longer everyday. Not enough hours in the day.)

I see that the usage of certain terms deemed dirty to use as a part of a slave mentality. Maybe not for theists that believe in god(s) but for those who do not. Those who refer to such faiths as "superstitions". Seems to me that there are certain words that just have a "do not touch me because I belong to the church and false gods" even though they have perfectly good usage in the English language. Part of the way I am trying to break that down, at least for myself, is by using words (not changing their definitions in any way) in the way that I see it fit. If I do not have "faith" in gods/goddesses in the like, why would I use faith in the definition of such?

I was trying to break the word out of the box that it's been placed in. Not asking anyone to change their meanings for the word and I will most certainly be obliged to submit and understand what they mean when others use the word faith.

This was a part of what I see as baby steps of progress. Breaking free of the religious bindings of language.

 Originally Posted By: Aklo
But it seems like it may be difficult for us, still, to flash on what you are actually trying to accomplish. If you had just gotten back from MiR and you were trying to undo the tyranny of political correctness, or redefine the word "wog", it might be clearer. What do you stand to gain by doing intensive semantics with a term that has degenerated into meaning "believing things that ain't so"? Are you just trying to take their Faith away from them at a whole new symbolic level?


I am not going to say that it is going to be extremely easy to grasp my ideas all the time. (Or for the most part lately, ever. \:\) ) I am simply trying to take baby steps through things and part of those baby steps in opening my mind to reality that faith has been bogged down for religious purposes. By all means, I will respond if someone has a question about what I am saying. I always have and will continue.

I am not trying to take THEIR faith from them. In fact, they use their faith in their own way taking their part of the definition and setting it to their religious values as they see fit. I am doing the same thing. The religious aspect of that definition has nothing to do with me. What I am using faith for is not much different from theirs with the exception that I am cutting the religion out of it.

Thus the examples of what I have faith in that I posted as examples in the original post. There has been discussion that they are not examples of faith but they are instead examples of expectations. The fact is, at the end of the night, I cannot prove that when I wake up my daughter is still in bed.. I could expect that she is because that's where she was when I last saw her but that doesn't mean she is. Faith being believing in something I cannot prove.. I cannot prove that she is down there until I go and check that she is there.. thus, practicing faith that she is there before I get there to check on her.


 Originally Posted By: Aklo
When we have a hypothesis, we go ahead and start by believing it, even without evidence.


Do we? If we truly did believe it without having any evidence, would there be any need to question it? A hypothesis is an educated guess that must be tested.

 Originally Posted By: Aklo
But we can't just stop there! We have to really test the theory, we have to do the suggested experiments, we have to be able to replicate them. If our hypothesis is true, it will stand up to the sort of scrutiny that man-made religions generally can't and won't and dare not. So in order to make it work, we have to not only believe but also disbelieve. And, it has to work, or, it's worthless.


Yes! The doubt aspect. The doubt aspect shows that we do not fully believe in the original hypothesis. If we truly believed there would be no reason to test it. We could argue it but push comes to shove it would leave no meaning and our argument would fail just on the basis of NOT testing it or having anything to back it up with.

I love the not only believe but disbelieve concept that you bring to the table Aklo. Mainly because it proves that doubt and faith really do go hand in hand. The hypothesis could be the faith that if X is introduced to Y then Z will happen. The experiment is testing the X and Y introduction. If Z fails to happen, then obviously the hypothesis is faulty but at one point we thought it was not completely. Back to the drawing board.

 Originally Posted By: Aklo

If we like our hypothesis, if we want it to be true, if we refuse to test it, and ignore the results that others get by testing it; if we argue in circles to prove we are right, without ever considering the immanent fact that in the real world, we have to be wrong, wrong, wrong, to ever be right; that is when our "faith" has degenerated into mere superstition. If it doesn't work, the experiment is over, we have to get over it, and go on, until something does.


Yes and in this comment I see a little bit of myself here at 600. I like my hypothesis of removing the religious trapping from the word faith. There are those that don't understand what I am talking about. However, I put this to the test here as I do with many things. I do consider things that I have said to be, for the mass majority, to be wrong and thus the reason I have conceded at some points, laid them to rest and done more reading. I have learned to put away my defenses and so much more. Sometimes testing one theory, can cause multiple changes. Not only affecting the theory/hypothesis itself but the one that holds and portrays the hypothesis to be scrutinized.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45388 - 12/21/10 04:57 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
If you want to dull the edge on the tool that is language, you go right ahead.

Me, I'll continue to use it in a way that conveys information in a more direct fashion.


 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Then what word would you suggest we use to describe belief without evidence?



I believe that the word that you are reaching for is something that you have used towards other people is:

"superstition"

When the faith in something that is physical or not physical is tested and fails it becomes a superstition. That sounds familiar, doesn't it?

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
There is a marked distinction between rational belief and irrational belief, and lumping them together under this particular banner as of the same stuff is a favoured tactic of those that would have us accept the latter as the former. THAT is why I find this distinction critical.


Rational belief and irrational belief can be enveloped by the idea of faith giving whichever definition that someone chooses to abide by and the subjective of the individual that believes what is really irrational/rational to them.

Does this mean that belief and faith are the same thing until proven to be superstition?


Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (12/21/10 05:01 PM)
Edit Reason: added quote.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45390 - 12/21/10 05:15 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: 6
If, however, I buy a can of soup and expect to find dog food, that would be an act of faith, or maybe stupidity. There's really no difference between the two if you ask me.


Well yes, if you buy a can of soup and expect it to be dog food that would be quite ignorant on your part. Now, if you bought a can of soup and it WAS dog food, well, that's quite another story.

 Originally Posted By: Matthew
To Org,

I have to admit I am having trouble understanding your position as well. You are in flux I think which is good though. Don't know where you will land?


I fear that is something that comes with the territory of discovering more about one's mind and trying to convey it for others to comment upon whether negatively or positively. I am trying to clean it up a bit. It may take me longer than a a few people but I'm at least TRYING. \:\)

Where will I land? I don't know. Maybe I will land in the outskirts of 600 land and exiled or maybe I won't. Either way, I won't back down and I think I stand for something. I have something to offer and I am trying to offer it. If not to be accepted but to offer something new to discuss. Sure, it starts fires at times but at least maybe it's given some people things to think about. (Even if it's other ways they can disagree with me! LOL) I really can be a good sport with this stuff so we'll see. \:\)
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45396 - 12/21/10 06:11 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Well yes, if you buy a can of soup and expect it to be dog food that would be quite ignorant on your part. Now, if you bought a can of soup and it WAS dog food, well, that's quite another story.


Yeah, if it was dog food that would be another story and someone would have some explaining to do. But it wouldn't mean that my original expectation of the can's contents was based on faith. It would mean that some person(s), somewhere, fucked up and should probably be fired.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#45397 - 12/21/10 06:22 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Org,

I do like your style, if you don't mind me saying. I can also appreciate having a long long reading list as I currently have one as well.

In relation to this soup business - wouldn't all of this more or less come under the heading of inductive reasoning? It may be a bit of a dodgy sort of induction though?

I think Jake may have nailed it in a prior post.

Top
#45398 - 12/21/10 06:39 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: ]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: 6

Yeah, if it was dog food that would be another story and someone would have some explaining to do. But it wouldn't mean that my original expectation of the can's contents was based on faith. It would mean that some person(s), somewhere, fucked up and should probably be fired.


I can see that, yes. I also like what Jake had to say on the matter of finding something in the soup and the like.

 Originally Posted By: Matthew
To Org,

I do like your style, if you don't mind me saying. I can also appreciate having a long long reading list as I currently have one as well.


Well thank you. I've always had a passion for reading it just seems that with all the other things to do in the day there is not much time for it. That's why I love pdfs. \:\)

 Originally Posted By: Matthew

In relation to this soup business - wouldn't all of this more or less come under the heading of inductive reasoning? It may be a bit of a dodgy sort of induction though?


By the broad usage of the term faith and the soup analogy, yes I suppose it could fall under inductive reasoning. Mainly because, saying all cans that are labeled soup are soup, can be proven to be false due to little incidents like that of the boy that Jake was describing who slipped a lizard in as a joke. Or for those who have found cans that are mislabeled only after they get home.

Inductive reasoning can in itself be very general and sometimes putting things under that kind of thinking can be a problem when leading into something specific.



 Quote:
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45401 - 12/21/10 07:35 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3934
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Though it is true that religious faith is indistinguishable from superstition, it remains that faith is the term both that the religious use to describe the basis on which they themselves believe, and also the header under which others would file them.

You are free to use whatever definition for whatever word you choose, or to omit any definition you choose, but why? As I have mentioned, language is only useful insofar as it can be meaningfully used to transmit an idea from one lump of grey matter to another, so what is the point of this exercise?

Where is the beef?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#45410 - 12/21/10 09:58 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Dan_Dread]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Though it is true that religious faith is indistinguishable from superstition, it remains that faith is the term both that the religious use to describe the basis on which they themselves believe, and also the header under which others would file them.

You are free to use whatever definition for whatever word you choose, or to omit any definition you choose, but why? As I have mentioned, language is only useful insofar as it can be meaningfully used to transmit an idea from one lump of grey matter to another, so what is the point of this exercise?

Where is the beef?


Where is the beef? I thought that was what was for dinner? LOL

No, in all seriousness though, in an environment such as 600 my usage of the word faith is not the same as anyone elses. Which, in order to have a decent conversation with someone here, means that I should use it as others (the majority) uses it. Unless I convey what I mean from the get go. Which I did in the post. I understand the confusion that arises from using a word out of what was deemed it's original context.

What my purpose with this thread was to challenge myself and others to think outside of the box with a word that is typically used with a christian undertone.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45417 - 12/22/10 12:58 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"...this actually started out as a mindless ramble on my part and then it turned into something that I wanted to see play out."

Are you finished watching it play out?

I would suggest that possibly you write your stream of consciousness thoughts in notepad or office, then reread them and edit them before you post them.

I believe this simple thing would make your point clearer to yourself and others.

Next...

Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#45420 - 12/22/10 01:27 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
I have tried for a long time to leave this thread alone. It seems we are conflating several meanings of the word 'faith', disregarding the fact that the word can mean different things in different contexts.

Faith, to my mind, is a cancer. A virus. A malignant growth arising from the mind's capacity to make qualified judgements on probability based on past experience and epistemology. I am of course speaking of the concept as pertains to "a belief unsubstantiated by evidence."

Now, before we hop on the infinite regress express to Solipsism city, let's bear in mind that the mind exists. You, gentle reader, exist. Not conclusively to me, but to yourself. Anything else would preclude the entire question of the validity of faith, belief, evidence or even the mind. As immortalized by Aquino's anecdote of the freshman philosophy student who called up his professor in the middle of the night, screaming "I've gotta know: do I exist?!", to which the response came: "And who wants to know?"

Once we have established that we have a mind, and that this mind is capable of observing the universe around itself (oh, so imperfectly!), the question arises whether any of it can be relied upon to be objectively real. The Gnostics claimed it couldn't be, as do several other members in here. It's imperfect and unreliable evidence on the same grounds that I have no evidence to suggest that my 'green' is your 'green' or even that your mind is anything more than an extension of my most masochistic of fantasies.

All of which puts us squarely back on the solipsism express. So let us, for the sake of argument, say that you - the observer - exist, as do you surroundings, because anything less would be an exercise in futility and could only result in the infinite regress. As with the Ruler of the Universe in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy books, who refuses to acknowledge the existence of anything beyond himself.

Once we have established that we operate in a universe of cause and effect, of discrete, observable phenomena and a set of physical laws that are imperfect only by our maddening incapacity for interpreting them perfectly, we are faced with the conundrum of the soup tin, the sunrise, Schrödinger's cat, etc. In these circumstances, evidence matters. It matters to the extent that without evidence to indicate a reasonable course of action, we might not survive getting out of bed in the morning. The lethal threats of physical existence would just be overwhelming. Most people would never leave the house for fear of crossing the street. Cars are zipping up and down at apparently random intervals at breakneck speed!

Eventually the mind develops certain mechanisms to handle these problems, such as "the green light on the pedestrian crossing is a good indicator that the cars have been magically stopped by a similar red light".

The mind doesn't need much more information to prod your weak-kneed body into motion. So, where's this faith? It alights on your mind, as do so very many things, in childhood. Mom and Dad considered you to be an unruly child, with a tendency to do ludicrously dangerous things with a seemingly psychotic disregard for personal safety. At their wit's end, they admonish "If you cross against a red light, your mother and I will die in our sleep / a millions gallons of custard will upend themselves on your head / you will be chased out of town by a pack of ravenous spider-wolf crossbreeds". Or: God will burn your pathetic little infidel soul in the fires of Gehenna for ever and ever.

The child's mind, incapable of separating the likely from the plausible (oh, the plausible - how great it once seemed to be, and how I still yearn to play there) meekly accepts that to cross against a red light is tantamount to the end of the world. Until he grows older and starts questioning the causality of the event, or even if there exists any kind of evidence to suggest its likelihood.

Evolution 'likes' faith, because it allows parents to lie to their kids in order to keep them alive. But when you grow up, you learn to hate these lies. It becomes increasingly apparent that you've been lied to, and that these lies have marked your psyche in ways that give you all kinds of baggage, like shame, guilt, fear and sexual taboos.

So you cheerfully set about removing these faith blocks, like you would remove the training wheels from a bicycle upon the coming of age, and hey, presto: you experience the sickening sense of vertigo that comes from realizing you can't just take anything on faith anymore. You need the evidence. You can not make educated guesses without it. Please note the adjective 'educated' here. You cannot predict with 100% certainty that the universe will behave as you foresee. The universe is an emergent system - it can behave in ways we can predict, but the further off the event or the more numerous the complications, the more uncertain we are.

Much like linear algebra; the more matrices included in the calculation, and the more unknowns thrown in, the lesser the accuracy of the prediction.

Without belief, humanity would have died out, consigned to the company of the dodo and the dinosaur by the sheer unquenchable fear of the unknown. Belief allows us to guesstimate the most sensible course of action, based on the available evidence.

This is not faith as I see it. Faith is looking at the sun, wincing as its rays hurt your eyes and concluding that they hurt because god lives in the sun and he doesn't like to be gawked at. Furthermore, faith is expecting evidence to support your belief in the sun-god after the first manned mission to the sun hurtles through the solar system. Faith is listening intently to the reports from the mission stating they can't register any god in the seething mass of fusion reactions, only a large number of uncontrolled atomic fusion cascades, and STILL insist that god is in there, because the instruments are imperfect and the astronauts are heathen demons sent to plague you.

Furthermore, faith is contagious. Your mind is just built that way. It is set on accepting anything that is told in an agreeable, sensible manner. This is why preachers, salesmen and cold readers have careers. People of a scientific bent, however, insist that you show them the evidence.

A final disclaimer: have faith in yourself. It is the only thing worth it. Do I exist, writing these words? How can you tell? You can't, but even so, it would mean that you thought this up yourself. Faith in the external is only for the weak. Keep your faith to yourself, in every sense of the word, and believe only that which has the potential for being true. Contrary to popular opinion, camels don't taste better after you have swallowed a sufficiently large enough number of them.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#45438 - 12/22/10 09:31 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
Skaf, The problem I see here is that we have no purely objective (or even evidentiary) means of distinguishing "bad" faith from "good". We all take certain shit for granted about the world, and some people push induction a bit further with their rational apparatus. We'd all like to put ourselves in the "I believe the least possible amount of bullshit" category, however, we disagree about a great many things - which begs the question.

The word "evidence" has been thrown around, and as much as I'd like to think I know what it means, it almost operates as a deus ex machina in this conversation. Evidence. End of story. Period. But I ask, what counts as evidence for the rising of the sun on the morrow? The Latin root of the word goes roughly to "out of (deriving from) vision," or "seeing is believing," and yet we are faced with the same problem again. Hume tackled this question with absolute fiercity, and yet I doubt anyone here is willing to follow him into the graveyard of induction.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45439 - 12/22/10 09:43 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
A good response, and one worth pondering. Evidence can, of course, as you suggest, be seen as a deus ex machina, or as some kind of epiphany. However, scientific evidence is gathered severally, and by double blind tests, from several sources, establishing a common reference among the proponents of a certain hypothesis.

Also, evidence is often used to *disprove* a hypothesis, and when the evidence fails to accumulate, the theory is strengthened.

The only thing that keeps evidence from being some mystic entity foisted on the unsuspecting observer by means of MEGO overload is the simple fact that everyone can test the experiment, everyone can try to disprove the theory and everyone is free to set forth new hypotheses under clinical conditions.

My main bone of contention with this procedure, however, lies with the bad rep hypotheses receive, since they are basically dreams with zero evidence to substantiate them. Hence we accumulate evidence by the method mentioned above.

You must be able to imagine in order to do science, in other words. But my support for the somewhat protean concept of evidence lies firmly rooted with the notion that everyone can replicate an experiment, checking to see if their findings support or weaken an already existing proposition.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#45440 - 12/22/10 10:08 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
What might be interesting in connection to evidence, reason and science being resistant to faith are the answers to Thaler's question at Edge.

The link starts at the first contribution. If you scroll up, you'll find Thaler's question and intro.
Especially Lakoff's part upon reason is quite interesting.

D.

Top
#45443 - 12/22/10 11:16 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
What I want to add is that words have a certain value and in our context, the word faith is linked to a negative emotion. It's because of that link we Satanists struggle with the very word faith and all it calls forth. It is also why we prefer reason, logic and evidence. They not only seem better, they feel better too.

I do understand your reasoning about double blind testing or evidence being verifiable by different sources, but when we'd be completely honest, we'd have to admit that we close to never test something ourselves, or are incapable in doing so.
We rely upon the validity of the evidence in the same manner as we rely upon the validity of the hypothesis or theory. We trust the scientists, even when, as shown many times, they might manipulate or disregard data. What we do have is faith in our scientists and faith in what they say. They are our priests explaining us how the world is.

Of course our trust and faith doesn't degenerate to the same depths many religious allow it to, but nevertheless, we haven't liberated ourselves from it either.

D.


Edited by Diavolo (12/22/10 11:18 AM)

Top
#45444 - 12/22/10 11:19 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
What I want to add is that words have a certain value and in our context, the word faith is linked to a negative emotion. It's because of that link we Satanists struggle with the very word faith and all it calls forth. It is also why we prefer reason, logic and evidence. They not only seem better, they feel better too.

I do understand your reasoning about double blind testing or evidence being verifiable by different sources, but when we'd be completely honest, we'd have to admit that we close to never test something ourselves, or are incapable in doing so.
We rely upon the validity of the evidence in the same manner as we rely upon the validity of the hypothesis or theory. We trust the scientists, even when, as shown many times, they might manipulate or disregard data. What we do have is faith in our scientists and faith in what they say. They are our priests explaining us how the world is.

Of course our trust and faith doesn't degenerate to the same depths many religious allow it to, but nevertheless, we haven't liberated from it either.

D.


Awesome post. Utterly on point (as I see it, lol).

JK
_________________________



Top
#45479 - 12/23/10 05:46 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jason King]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
While I agree that the onus for establishing certainty lies with the individual, I would question the reason for ascribing 'faith' as the qualifier. There exists a scientific community. The competition for funding and research project priority is fierce. If there's something you can cut your teeth on, it's disproving a previously accepted theory and substituting your own. It gets you quoted and builds respect in the community. You get more funding to research all the hot topics.

In short, for anything other than objective truth to be researched, it would require a world-wide conspiracy to keep all the researchers from outing the scientific community to the world.

If there is some conviction in me regarding the scientific community's trustworthiness, it is that they can be relied upon to cut each other to shreds over any inaccuracy or fallibility. Much like bad ideas in here. People can establish credibility by tearing down other members' lines of reasoning, all in the interest of establishing a more perfect understanding of the topics.

Faith? I prefer to think of it as a conviction that the people who attempt to reach truth through the scientific method can be relied on to fight each other, tooth and bloody nail, over who has the more perfect understanding of objective truth. Since this will, by necessity, always be an approximation, the struggle will go on for ever and ever.

I don't need to research black holes through government-funded satellites and hi-tech microscopes to establish a good approximation of certainty that the research results are reliable. All it takes is the knowledge that competition will remain fierce.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#45480 - 12/23/10 06:03 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I do not necessarily agree. No offense but I think you are trying to dodge the use of the word faith while actually replacing it with synonyms. If you'd browse the history of science, you will find too many examples of groundbreaking work or theories which got ridiculed or their funding withdrawn.

Overall I do not think scientists will lie to us but even that, I take on faith.

D.

Top
#45481 - 12/23/10 06:21 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
This very discussion is evidence that scientific progress, and the pursuit of knowledge will always win out over faith-based convictions.

Any faith-based arguments can be co-opted into the contention that 'I have been divinely vouchsafed this information by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and as such I hold an intrinsically superior position to any supported by your silly 'evidence''.

While I support and even appreciate the arguments that you and Jason King supply here - I do recognize the inherent weaknesses in the scientific process - I still maintain that evidence-based research is superior to faith.

The ridicule of past theories that you mention is an example of these weaknesses. There are several others, far more condemning. But even so, they will be called out and ridiculed. And if there's one thing they will not stand for, it's ridicule.

As for my wilful dodging of the so-called 'synonyms', I have long maintained a strict separation of faith and evidence-based belief/conviction. If this makes me 'protest too much', then so be it.

Surrendering to faith sets a lethal precedent for your mind, and restrainst it. There is no escaping faith, but it can be isolated and recognized for its harmful influence.

With all of this said, I'll reiterate my opening statement that your input is vitally important for me to hold my convictions, since it challenges and refines them. Eventually, I may be convinced you're right, or vice versa, or we'll remain at a stalemate, but either way we'll have learned from the process. Which is sort of the point.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#45484 - 12/23/10 06:28 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Oh but I fully agree that there is a difference between evidence-based faith and let's call it, mythology-based faith, even more when we are able to check the evidence ourselves. I'm certainly not going to argue that. The main thing I argue is that, no matter if we like it or not, both are, fundamentally, faith. And this is what seems to trouble many.

D.

Top
#45485 - 12/23/10 06:29 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Quote:
Surrendering to faith sets a lethal precedent for your mind, and restrainst it. There is no escaping faith, but it can be isolated and recognized for its harmful influence.


Referring to a word with a christian undertone also restrains you. I can see how letting 'faith' in the context of laughing in the face of the skeptics and using it as an excuse for believing in shadows as being a restraint as well though.

 Quote:
but either way we'll have learned from the process. Which is sort of the point.


YES.

Note: I know that this was aimed at JK and D and not me but you hit the nail on the head.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45487 - 12/23/10 06:42 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Oh but I fully agree that there is a difference between evidence-based faith and let's call it, mythology-based faith, even more when we are able to check the evidence ourselves. I'm certainly not going to argue that. The main thing I argue is that, no matter if we like it or not, both are, fundamentally, faith. And this is what seems to trouble many.

D.

"Faith" can mean either of those things but I would argue that they are fundamental different things. One is the process of drawing probable conclusions from evidence, the other is believing in a conclusion and sometimes seeing evidence to support it. I would say it's an error of language to call these the same. Semantics and no more.

Now I suppose you could say that based on evidence there is a certain level of "faith" because you are often taking a conclusion from a probability. But as I said before I think the process for probability estimation faith and conclusion validation faith justify separate definitions.

In English and I assume probably all latin based languages we have one word for what we see as the color blue. If the blue is lighter or darker we use an adjective to describe this. In Japanese they see the lighter area ranges and darker ranges as two separate colors so they have two different words for them.

As with all matters like this there's no correct answer because language is something that is defined as it is naturally used. Language can be quite an obstacle when debating something open to interpretation. All I can say is I believe we would be better off if our language had different words for these different ideas.


Edited by TV is God (12/23/10 06:49 AM)

Top
#45489 - 12/23/10 06:47 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: TV is God]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: TV is God

"Faith" can mean either of those things but I would argue that they are fundamental different things. One is the process of drawing probable conclusions from evidence, the other is believing in a conclusion and sometimes seeing evidence to support it. I would say it's an error of language to call these the same. Semantics and no more.


Of course, when you are the scientist in question. But what I am getting to, and what you would have to admit to, is that you, in all too many cases, haven't made up the theory or hypotheses, nor the evidence supporting or disproving it, and that as a result of that, for us personally, it all ends back at faith.

D.

Top
#45490 - 12/23/10 07:04 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
I would disagree. You draw your conclusions based on the probability of the theory or hypothesis. You choose whether or not to believe in these based on where you discover them and/or how you've seen them used. You base how much belief you put in that source based on the whether it has been credible to you before or is regarded as credible and so on and so on. Zoomed out it may look like something you believe because of faith but take a close look and it's a long chain of logical conclusions based on probabilities.

It's critical when working with probabilities to acknowledge there is a margin of error big or small every step of the way. I don't think that makes something "faith."

Top
#45491 - 12/23/10 07:25 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: TV is God]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I don't draw my conclusion upon the probability of a theory or on the probability of evidence. I draw my conclusion on the fact that I don't even know the probability.

I draw my conclusion on the fact that I believe something someone told me, or which I read somewhere. You do the same. The only difference is that I admit it.

D.

Top
#45492 - 12/23/10 07:49 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I don't draw my conclusion upon the probability of a theory or on the probability of evidence. I draw my conclusion on the fact that I don't even know the probability.

I draw my conclusion on the fact that I believe something someone told me, or which I read somewhere. You do the same. The only difference is that I admit it.

D.


Kind of throws me back into the words of The Satanic Bible, which is pretty much where the almost expected cynicism and distrust of faith arises.

"13 The most dangerous of all enthroned lies is the holy, the sanctified, the 
privileged lie the lie everyone believes to be a model truth. It is the fruitful 
mother of all other popular errors and delusions. It is a hydra-headed tree of 
unreason with a thousand roots. It is a social cancer!  

14 The lie that is known to be a lie is half eradicated, but the lie that even 
intelligent persons accept as fact—the lie that has been inculcated in a little 
child at its mother’s knee—is more dangerous to contend against than a 
creeping pestilence!"

The Satanic Bible (Book of Satan - page 32)

The sun rising in the morning, the everyday things we take for granted are only loosely associated with faith, based on rational expectation, based on statistical probabilities. The sun NOT rising in the morning is simply a statistical anomaly of the highest order OR the catastrophic failure of a physical system. We really do ourselves a severe injustice when we allow our minds to somehow bring them under some divine control of a being or spirit.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#45493 - 12/23/10 07:50 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
If you think I'm not admitting it then I think you are misinterpreting my post. Probability is somewhat of an abstraction until you can study it more scientifically and pop out some exact numbers. But I think the impressions of probability are only "faith" if you believe in them undeniably or outside what probability seems to dictate. If you're wrong then you're wrong, counting your rights and your wrongs are how probability becomes better understood.

I think rounding your probabilities is only logical. If not you can go into the shallow "anything is possible so you don't know what's true!" mindset. Yes it's technically possible this website is a hallucination in your own head but just because you don't know the exact probabilities it's safe to say they're too minuscule to conciser. If you don't adopt this opinion you end up with that old faith-defense theory that the belief in science is a faith like any other.

It would be faith to take a theory for proven if the probabilities are still uncertain, but to take it as a "probably" until you have a better understanding in detail of the probability.

Top
#45494 - 12/23/10 08:06 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Indeed Jake, there is no reason to start assuming things that always worked or happened, will suddenly not work or happen, even when there might be a probability so small we can't even imagine its number.

When I get into an airplane, I trust I will arrive at my destination. I don't need to know all the details about aerodynamics, gravity etc to be rather sure I'll be fine. I trust on the fact that the majority of airplanes arrives at their destination without suddenly falling apart or dropping from the sky. I'm pragmatic about it, I've been flying before and it is enough reason for me to know I'll be fine the next time too. This is true for most of the things I do in real life; from driving a car to buying a can of soup. I trust on past experience even when I do know probabilities can turn against me.

But there are other levels, especially when it comes to knowledge, where this trust is actually a synonym for faith. Take the example of climate science fraud. After the famous hockey stick it became clear climate science wasn't as honest as expected and a lot of data was manipulated and hidden. At the same time, we all had our ideas about climate science, took our position in it and even let it affect our daily lives; mostly through politics or green agendas.

Then it turned out not everything they said was necessarily as it is. We discovered we took much of what was said on trust (faith). Why did we do so? For one because we can't do much else, another because we still seem to be subject to authority.

We can't escape having faith. At times, when you agree with someone, you can't but agree with him knowing what he says is true, even when you are beyond the capacities ever verifying it really is.

D.

Top
#45504 - 12/23/10 12:32 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1751
Loc: New York
General reply:

For me one significant difference between religious faith and “scientific faith,” is the delivery of the argument.

If one asks a priest why they should believe in religious faith the answer will often be something like “because it is in the bible,” “Pray on it,” “Open you heart,” “People have believed it for thousands of years and all those people can’t be wrong.

If one asks a scientists why they should believe what the scientists claims, the scientist will often whip out some instruments, gadgets, and tangible things and show you how his experiment works and how he reached the conclusion, and will also likely let you perform the experiment yourself. At that point IF you reach a different conclusion they will not simply tell you that you are wrong, but will consider where you might have made a mistake, re due the experiment and if need be they will adjust their way of thinking when your experiment turns out to have yielded a different result from theirs.

My scientific faith can be easily changed by tangible proof if it is contrary to what I believe to be true. Religious faith is much more difficult to disprove with tangible evidence.

So yes, science and religion are both based on some kind of faith. However, in my opinion there is enough difference between one faith and the other to justify them as being completely separate and different notions.



Edited by Asmedious (12/23/10 12:39 PM)
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#45510 - 12/23/10 01:19 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2599
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Indeed Jake, there is no reason to start assuming things that always worked or happened, will suddenly not work or happen, even when there might be a probability so small we can't even imagine its number.

When I get into an airplane, I trust I will arrive at my destination.

That's the spirit!

_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#45551 - 12/24/10 12:11 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: Diavolo]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
I have to agree with you that that there is alwaus hope in much that we do. As a satanis I try to think things through for the most part. There are always times in life when s lot of us would wish for someone of something to be watching over us. I believe it is only natural to feel this way and want more. I have 4 kids and have gone through some hell with the things my oldest daughter has gone through that leads me to believe there is defenitely nothing looking out for her. All of my hope is lost but for all of you that still have some I wish u the best.. Some things in life happpen and make u whou are and that is true in my case. You're life is what u make it.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45663 - 12/26/10 09:46 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: manofsteel]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
Faith is a loaded term that means various things to various people. There have been (and will continue to be) many right-hand path followers who attempted (will attempt) to analytically collapse and make concrete abstract ideas concerning the indescribable, for example, faith.

Satanists are faithless.

Let me try to advance this revealed propositional Truth by taking the simple three word sentence a bit further. Embracing Satanism, left-hand path individuals are concerned with pragmatic ultimacy- the Self. Having a belief in something higher possessing attributes like omniscence, omnipotence and omniprescence remains mere blind groping in the dark until a realization of importance comes about: The Self.

Bias towards empirical thoughts predisposes one to questions which are areas of thought either to complicate or make easier the matter. (you descide) For example: 1) The Self is the object Satanists are concerned with because it exists making it real. 2) It is neither spiritual or material; completing the second inquiry probing the area of the nature of the Self. 3) Finally, the Self is indirectly real because their are many human-animals which inhere a unique Self which they claim ownership.

As my further investigation goes, Satanists have an indirect Self that is real.
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#45664 - 12/26/10 10:41 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: paolo sette]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
We can't escape having faith. At times, when you agree with someone, you can't but agree with him knowing what he says is true, even when you are beyond the capacities ever verifying it really is.


Example here: Having the conversation with my boss that the reason I was late for work was because the bus was late. Something he accepts as truth but can't really prove.

But I do also agree with:

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
...there is no reason to start assuming things that always worked or happened, will suddenly not work or happen..


 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
So yes, science and religion are both based on some kind of faith. However, in my opinion there is enough difference between one faith and the other to justify them as being completely separate and different notions.


Agreed. It's unfortunate that there aren't separate terms for the two notions. However, that is why the individual has the option to choose what it may mean to them through various definitions. (Depending on the discussion at hand, of course.)

 Originally Posted By: ManOfSteel
As a satanis I try to think things through for the most part. There are always times in life when s lot of us would wish for someone of something to be watching over us. I believe it is only natural to feel this way and want more. I have 4 kids and have gone through some hell with the things my oldest daughter has gone through that leads me to believe there is defenitely nothing looking out for her.


There are a couple of things I want to respond to in this paragraph.
1.) You said you just do your best to think things through and that is the best that we can do. \:\)

2.) It IS natural for us to want someone to have our backs and watch over us and many of us have that. Just not a god type. We have family and friends that watch out for us. And your daughter does have someone watching out for her.. you. (Note: I don't know the entire story but until my daughter grows up and is stable enough and even after, I will always be watching. \:\) ) She can have "faith" in that.

Whoa, someone hand me a tissue, I just got sappy. My bad... moving on..

 Originally Posted By: ManOfSteel
Some things in life happpen and make u whou are and that is true in my case. You're life is what u make it.


Cheers.

 Originally Posted By: paolo
Faith is a loaded term that means various things to various people.

Agreed.

 Originally Posted By: paolo
Satanists are faithless.

Disagree. Completely. Not only via the definition I used faith for in the OP but also, there are many tangible things that Satanists have faith in. A good example: We have faith in ourselves.

 Originally Posted By: paolo
Having a belief in something higher possessing attributes like omniscence, omnipotence and omniprescence remains mere blind groping in the dark until a realization of importance comes about:

This statement shows that while you state in the beginning of your post that "faith" has various meanings; it only has one meaning to you.

 Originally Posted By: Paolo
As my further investigation goes, Satanists have an indirect Self that is real.


I may be misunderstanding you but as the "Self" is determined as real, it is more direct than indirect, don't you think?
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45675 - 12/27/10 01:43 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
she was malested if that makes it any better for you. I still don't want you to have to shed a tear but I just wanted you to know. I seek no sympathy I just want to be clear on what we are talking about. I know 100% where i stand and have no queations about anyo9ne else because I don't give a shit. Just making conversation.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45677 - 12/27/10 01:59 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: manofsteel]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
That is just awful. I've been down similar roads myself. I empathize with the situation but she still has your support, correct?

I always hate hearing about things like that. It sickens me the things that some kids have to go through in their lives.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45679 - 12/27/10 02:05 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
She is my baby girl and will always have my support. Thanks for your comments, I really appreciate them. It's always even worse when it is family that did it so we can all suffer and want to kill people forever just for looking at us or my kids wrong. Confused but pissed off and don't understand why people are so fucked up. If it is that bad keepit to your gad damn self.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45680 - 12/27/10 02:10 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
Thank you for responding hon. I was just wanting to vent and you helped me do that. I appreciate it. Thank you. It has been a while since my daughter's issue and she is doing good just for FYI. I am just blowin off steam.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45681 - 12/27/10 02:15 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: manofsteel]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
Not a problem at all; anytime. I am glad that she is doing well. It is hard to recover from things like that. \:\)

It's nice to see proactive and supportive parents. It's people like that, even in those circumstances, make stronger children for this world.


Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (12/27/10 02:17 AM)
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45682 - 12/27/10 02:17 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
Hope you enjoyed a happy and cheerful holliday and get to party your ass off for new year's. Good luck this year.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45683 - 12/27/10 02:21 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: manofsteel]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
My holiday was a mix of my world (my daughter) and a mess of family. It was a great one even if it was a rough year. Here's to the New Year, may it be prosperous for us all.

Much love to you and yours. \:\)
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#45685 - 12/27/10 02:23 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
You too. I wish well for your daughter and you.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#45689 - 12/27/10 03:19 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
@O.K.:
sorry you had trouble following my writing. I'll try to be more brief and clear.

ignoring a single person in a cybernetic zone leaves a hole, but does not erase the effect they continue to have upon the zone and people in it. in video-chats, requiring that someone come on camera is insufficient to guarantee their 'reality'. what one is seeing may be a film of someone else or of the person from a previous time. the request to that person to reply vocally might be misunderstood due to lag or a malfunctioning microphone. the request to duplicate a gesture on cam can function in an identifying significance.

'Satanism' doesn't make a good umbrella term because its form is a singular ideological descriptor, whereas the term 'Satanity' relates (positively) to the figure of Satan (as a symbol or an intelligence or any ambiguity using the term/title/name) and refers to all Satanisms which individuals and cults might embrace (it isn't about ideals, but about clarified references, a refined aggregate term anyone might use).

if you're goin' into everything alone, then you're not involved with religion by my estimation, since religion is a group affair. you're doing your own spiritual thing, naturally, and within such a context any term you want to use in any way you like is perfect. thanks for making more clear that you're describing your own personal language and not planning to use it for communication without helping us out. in such a case, definitions are of course not important, and my comments irrelevant. I wasn't suggesting that you needed to be taught anything, but quite the reverse, that your contentions need not apply to anyone else's Satanism. thanks!
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#45726 - 12/28/10 05:49 AM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: paolo sette]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
@paolo: as a term, 'faith' is only loaded because religious pile it full of responsibilities and burdens, then expect that those outside their cults should agree with their irrational conclusions. this also applies inside Satanic cults, where people take their philosophy or dogmas on faith.

as a left-hand path individual, i dispute the reality of any special "Self" excepting as a psychological and mystical prop. I don't know why you would find value in it otherwise. the fallacious "omnis" are fun but unpersuasively fictional, whether they are mapped to fantasy Gods or fantasy Selves.

regarding the complication or simplification of these matters, adding a fantasy 'Self' affecting it all makes it more complex. specifying that this fantasy doesn't partake of an artificial dualism (spiritual / material) isn't clarifying. psychology and ordinary conceptually-reflective consciousness seem sufficient to account for the behaviour of complex organisms and their recursive awareness, though most of them claim nothing of the sort about having any kind of self. I cannot understand what you mean by 'an indirect Self' and am convinced that all selves are either material (bodily organisms) or figmentary (psychological facets used for orientation and engagement of the world, mapping the organism having it to an environmental context).
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#45741 - 12/28/10 03:41 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: nocTifer]
FlameReborn Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/15/09
Posts: 36
Loc: SPFLD,OH,USA
I think faith as a term depends on its usage. Faith in external beings, unless it yields some form of undeniable benefit, is pretty extreme in the religious department. However, faith in yourself and the things you do (whether spiritual or mundane) is the first step in being your own god. The Concept/Spirit of the Adversary (Satan to Satanists) is in opposition to the right hand path. Gods and Goddesses are in turn sought within oneself and externalized faith is also re-routed to ones own self. Personally, I don;t think you have to sacrifice any "atheistic" principle to accept that.
Top
#45747 - 12/29/10 06:08 PM Re: Faith - Dirty word or misconception? [Re: FlameReborn]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
Faith means "an inner religious experience of involvement of a particular person: the impingement on him of the transcendent putative or real."

The quality of the responses provided were that of a personalistic-subjective approach that emphasized the personal involvement of the individual in seeking Truth (your Truth). What comes further down the road with this approach is tradition which is nothing but a potential pattern for personal involvement. Still further on the way, we have tradition becoming religion as it expresses or elicits faith. My approach is anti-religionistic; hence, highly unpersonalistic.

In addition, the strength of the replies could be deemed as person-centered which cannot help but examine a life from the historical perspective. Comparative studies of religious ways of life across centuries and around the world is an inevitable end result. Investigating life from this angle emphasizes a necessity of a distinction between faith and belief that is based on (e.g.) a survey of humankind's (your) history.

A third look can be viewed as though each has their own integral vision of faith which is a significant proposal that may appeal to some. People that have a vision verily would be of subject-nature. I emphasize faith as object.

I'm surrounded by pure Evil. What is caled Evil opposes the rules of morality dictated by reason even if Evil knows well what the rules are. The awareness of such an opposition exists because I see and know Evil as Evil. There have been some who have tried to breakdown Evil with offering gradations of the dualistic notion by offering terms such as "root Evil." The awareness of root Evil means the awareness of a high degree of Evil. This is the kind of Evil that exists from the standpoint of reason which activates a disobedience and lack of attachment to the rules of morality. Realization of Evil within one's innermost self speaks to the antimoral quality of the Self.

The thoroughness of the principal of good requires the absolutization of the autonomy of reason, and good is aware of the contradictory nature within the standpoint of morality. This good-self cannot avoid or evade the Pharisaical hypocrisy which is attachment to rules.

Faith, I have none.
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#45754 - 12/29/10 10:03 PM Hello, is this Merriam? K.I.S.S. please. [Re: paolo sette]
JWG Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 68
Let's keep this simple.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith?show=0&t=1293677890
 Quote:


faith
noun \ˈfāth\
plural faiths \ˈfāths, sometimes ˈfāthz\
Definition of FAITH
1
a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2
a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust


Loyalty, belief, complete trust, no proof.

Nothing I wish to be a part of or consciously practice.

If it's Satanic, it's not included in practice.

I fail to see why it's "dirty" or a "misconception" at all, unless we make it out to be such. ;\)


Edited by JWG (12/29/10 10:04 PM)
_________________________
In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play.
-Friedrich Nietzsche


Top
#45768 - 12/30/10 01:02 PM Re: Hello, is this Merriam? K.I.S.S. please. [Re: JWG]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I think the most interesting aspect to faith is not as much what it means or to what degree we have it but why the word has such an effect on some.

Many satanists I know just shrug when someone calls them a Nazi but when the word faith is uttered, the reactions become hefty at times. And as such, faith becomes almost a power-word. To me personally, this almost taboo feeling was interesting enough to explore why it had such an effect on me.

D.

Top
#46407 - 01/10/11 11:51 AM Re: Hello, is this Merriam? K.I.S.S. please. [Re: Diavolo]
hellbeliever Offline
banned
stranger


Registered: 01/06/11
Posts: 7
Some people on youtube (mary K baxter) they are believing in something, and its like they really with convinction they speak.

i refer to youtube: Mary K baxter. revelations of hell

now i like to know more, thats why i am visting this forum (i am lying...is this ok?)

Top
#46424 - 01/10/11 12:25 PM Re: Hello, is this Merriam? K.I.S.S. please. [Re: hellbeliever]
Dutch Satanist Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/19/10
Posts: 69
Loc: Delft, The Netherlands
I did a quick search on Mary K. Baxter and it confirmed my suspicions. Just another Christian whack-job that claims to have gone to hell and back. If you want some cheap entertainment, then indulge yourself and search that name on Youtube.
_________________________
“There is a beast in man that needs to be excersised, not exorcised.”

Top
Page all of 7 12345>Last »


Moderator:  SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.109 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 110 queries. Zlib compression disabled.