GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I know more than a few of these people, all raised as atheists. And then there's publications like the Skeptic. Still, doubting that there are accurate numbers, I tend to agree with you.
I suspect there is no actual disagreement apart from the definitions (though claiming to have no beliefs does imply a rather odd definition of "belief", IMO).
The original claim by enorbet (that he has no 'beliefs') is here:
I don't have beliefs. There's what I know and what I don't know on a sliding scale of confidence....and i don't know a LOT.
Are you really saying you don't believe injustice is right or wrong, you don't believe subjugation is right or wrong, you don't believe poverty is right or wrong, you don't believe prejudges is right or wrong, you don't have an Pavlovian political response, you don't have an innate moral stance?
But all this is determined solely from your understanding of facts?
A lot of people would say, "I know what is right, facts be dammed!" and if they didn't the world would be a very different place. A place with much less science and technology for a start, and probably much less freedoms as well!
These things aren't usually governed by a sliding scaly of confidence (gained by a grater or lesser understanding of the premise), its a belief, a stance that people take (a gut reaction), ether consciously or subconsciously. At a basic level 'belief' isn't a religious thing at all, it's a human thing.
Surely we don't know, or learn, these things as much as feel them...
It's just how we are - whether through nature or nurture, it's irrelevant to the outcome!
As far as religion is concerned, surely if you truly believe your religion is real, then to you it is real, and vice versa. Ether way the view doesn't become a problem until it is forced upon someone else, or otherwise causes harm to someone else.
I think that the word, "belief," as used in a [Christian] religious context, does have a specific restricted meaning. I think that it means that you accept something to be true, either without evidence that it is true and/or in disregard of evidence that might suggest that it is not. It is, "a leap of faith." As one pastor put it, "belief is what makes Peter step out of the boat and onto the water."
I think that the word, "belief," as used in a [Christian] religious context, does have a specific restricted meaning. I think that it means that you accept something to be true, either without evidence that it is true and/or in disregard of evidence that might suggest that it is not. It is, "a leap of faith." As one pastor put it, "belief is what makes Peter step out of the boat and onto the water."
Then perhaps everyone is arguing about the wrong word!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxford Dictionary
Belief:
An acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof:
Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion:
A religious conviction:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxford Dictionary
Faith:
Complete trust or confidence in someone or something:
Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof:
A particular religion:
A strongly held belief:
So that's all clear as mud then
I suppose you could take from this that: Belief is a firmly held opinion without proof.
Faith is complete trust based on spiritual conviction.
I thought I thoroughly covered why I profess to have no beliefs, only things I know and things I don't know *the latter group being huge) and that this body of knowledge is on a sliding scale of confidence based on importance. Anything of importance like those mentioned with incredulity get lots of attention and deep scrutiny. My body of knowledge is fluid, not static, since I don't have opinions on things for which I have no evidence, which includes both primary and secondary. I covered how secondary experience earns trust and that it is NOT that it "feels right to me" but that it holds up under scrutiny.
Thank yous to garryg68 and sundialsvcs for being precise on the definitions of "beliefs" and "faith".
I read through this thread from your comet, and it appears that at a base level people are arguing about the same thing based on semantics and their own understanding and interpretation of the word 'belief.'
Personally I would still call the deliberations of your thought-process your 'belief' as that word has no particular religious connotation to me, and to my mind describes the same thing as you have described in a different way.
But if, to you, that word has associations that you don't like then I think in that context it's perfectly fine for you to say you don't have 'belief.'
Everyone is different, and should be allowed to be...
I do have one question though.
Would you say that, in a very non-religious way, you have 'faith' in your conclusions, after your scrutiny of the facts?
Or has that word also been too 'christianised' for you?
I don't mean this question in a negative way at all, I'm just curious as to peoples understanding of these terms.
If I hear the word 'belief' or (to a lesser extent) 'faith' I don't immediately think it has religious overtures, unless the speaker makes them
Yeah, looks like you skipped the step where everyone makes sure they're using compatible definitions, that always leads to a lot of pointless arguing and people talking pasting each other.
Surprise, surprise! Words have more than one meaning!
Belief: something one accepts as true. For example, the jury believed the defendant was guilty of the murder: they didn't know, because they weren't there to see him do it. Most of the things we know, we actually believe. Anyone who only acted on knowledge would do very little — decide to get a degree, decide to get married? How can they know that they're doing the right thing?. Anyone who is unwilling to believe is probably one of the conspiracy theorists found in the General Forum...
It can let us change words to be as clear or not as we wan't... dictionaries, ideas even bibles did not sell themselves.
"Faith" is a circler argument until logic and truth step in. "We" may not know diddly about gravity but "we" know enough for it to be real like wood from trees. If my friend goes to collect some for the fire I can have "faith"\assume they will be back but a bear could get them.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.