Blind Faith

[jean-luc]

Q: does blind faith have to be bad? I mean, do all atheists (or anti-theists, if you prefer) believe that blind faith is an intrinsically negative thing? I think we could all discover examples of blind faith in our lives, whether religious or secular in nature. I always get the feeling from the majority here that faith is considered a generally bad thing, and I would strongly challenge that, regardless of my own religious convictions (which err less on the side of faith).

[SkyPanda]

If your friend builds three planes and they all fly, believing that the fourth one works before you know enough about it's design and construction to reason about whether it will can be considered an act of faith because it's a conclusion that isn't logically valid, but isn't blind as it's supported by inconclusive evidence.

I'm not sure that is 'faith' as such, it's just bad logic. Faith is a complete disregard for logic. Err, right? This is sort of a semantic thing here, and dictionaries aren't helpful as they usually refer to religious faith or trust/confidence. I think that when most people say "faith", they're referring to an abscence of logic or data. But I could be very wrong. xD

[jinxed_07]

Stupidity would be an absense of logic, to say that was faith would be correct.
Oh, and to say faith is bad would be like saying trust is bad, as they can be the same thing.

This is sort of a semantic thing here, and dictionaries aren't helpful as they usually refer to religious faith or trust/confidence

Dictionary's DO give a good definiton

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.

And remember that old post where I accidently said

My faith isn'tfaith

and took it back?
Well I take back me taking it back, as my faith doesn't go and isn't completely based on belief without proof, or the other way around, What about testimonies?

[Atilla]

Q: does blind faith have to be bad? I mean, do all atheists (or anti-theists, if you prefer) believe that blind faith is an intrinsically negative thing? I think we could all discover examples of blind faith in our lives, whether religious or secular in nature. I always get the feeling from the majority here that faith is considered a generally bad thing, and I would strongly challenge that, regardless of my own religious convictions (which err less on the side of faith).

There doesn't have to have a reason! I have faith than blind faith is bad!

In other words, the problem with blind faith is that it can stifle critical thinking and thus lead to people doing things which are extremely stupid and/or harmful to others because they have an unfounded belief that they are right, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. It is then very difficult to dissuade them because they take no heed of reasoning or evidence. Indeed, many of the worst kinds of prejudice and bigotry are based on an unjustified belief - a blind faith, if you will - that, for example, all gay people are paedophiles and women should get beaten if they disobey their husband, whether this is because God says so or because pappy brought you up that way or because you just don't bother with that whole "reasoning" thing. Things like the Milgram experiment or the Heaven's Gate mass suicide also confirm, in many people's eyes, the dangers of placing blind faith in an authority.

One could also make a comparison with some psychological problems, or beliefs which are commonly held to be delusional or ridiculous. If you have an unfounded fear of knees, or you believe without evidence that the Man is trying to control your mind with subliminal messages in pop music, we call it phobia or paranoia and say you should get therapy. However, if you have an unfounded fear of going to hell, or believe without evidence that Satan is trying to control your mind with subliminal messages in rock music, that is apparently Faith and has to be cherished and praised. If you believe God created the universe with His magic wand, that's fine; replace "God" with "Moon Elves", and you're a loony. The contempt in which Otherkin are commonly held is another good example of people who have the "wrong" faith being derided. Why should people's faith that they are dragons be considered less worthy than faith that you created in the image of God? For that matter, if blind faith is so spiffy, why shouldn't I determine my worldview by rolling a d20 and having faith in the die, or consulting a magic 8-ball?

[otters]

In other words, the problem with blind faith is that it can

But does all blind faith have to be bad?

[SkyPanda]

Oh, and to say faith is bad would be like saying trust is bad, as they can be the same thing.

If faith necessarily involves believing something without reason, and trust does not, then it seems to me to be valid to attack faith without needing to attack trust, even if trust can sometimes involve a degree of faith. You also seem to be suggesting that the concept of trust is beyond reproach, but I think any trust which involves faith is certainly open to criticism.

[SlappyMcGee]

In other words, the problem with blind faith is that it can

But does all blind faith have to be bad?

I think that's the point Atilla gets at in his post. I have reasonable faith that a '96 Buick will not appear from nowhere. fall through my ceiling and end the tragic tale of SlappyMcGee, and I blindly assume this is true. The consequence of this faith is that I won't live my life in fear. It's the consequences of the faith that determine it's quality; if you blindly assume Christ is real and the only net effect is that you live a happier life, then your faith was, in that case, good.

Did anybody watch House last night? Spoiler ahead. A guy blindly had faith that he could fly, so he jumped off a garage and severely hurt himself. This is the other facet of blind faith; we used something called common sense to reach our conclusion that we can not fly when we jump off garages. Why? Because nobody has before, at least to our knowledge. We would be deluded to believe that we could fly without evidence.

So, in sum, I think there are three forms of faith:

1) "good" faith, faith that is blind, based on nothing but only impacts those around you positively.
2) "better" faith, faith that reasonable things will happen based on reasonable observation
3) Outright delusion, faith not based on common sense and with negative consequences.

So, for the example with the friend building the fourth plane, that is the second. For the most part, the first one is true about most religious people. It's not based on logic, sure, but if it can only have positive circumstances, then I would argue that the absolute truth isn't important.

Oh, and to maintain my rep, "LOLS PASGHETTI MONSTER".

[Tanner]

I have reasonable faith that a '96 Buick will not appear from nowhere, fall through my ceiling and end the tragic tale of SlappyMcGee, and I blindly assume this is true.

And yet aren't the combined odds of a system as complex as the current iteration of a human being evolving from its most basic building blocks via natural selection about equal to this? I fully understand the difference between blind faith and extrapolation from observable evidence but, I mean, people have been hit by cars before. Maybe we can extrapolate that if a car's gonna hit you, it'll be driven by my grandmother and come in through your roof.

[jinxed_07]

Oh, and to say faith is bad would be like saying trust is bad, as they can be the same thing.

If faith necessarily involves believing something without reason, and trust does not, then it seems to me to be valid to attack faith without needing to attack trust, even if trust can sometimes involve a degree of faith. You also seem to be suggesting that the concept of trust is beyond reproach, but I think any trust which involves faith is certainly open to criticism.

Yes, but you can trust someone for doing something for the same reason you can have faith in someone/something, and I'm suggesting that if you attack faith that you would also be attacking trust, to a certain degree.

[Atilla]

In other words, the problem with blind faith is that it can

But does all blind faith have to be bad?

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

There are certainly instances where blind faith might lead to a neutral or positive outcome. However, the mere possibility of a positive outcome isn't really enough to recommend a course of action in general. If the alternatives are superior, or if the action is more likely to result in negative outcomes than positive, it is still undesirable. I think that if you want to argue that people should just let go of the steering wheel and have faith that the car will go the right way, you're going to have to show that it's safer than hopping aboard the Rationality Bus, so to speak.

[SkyPanda]

Yes, but you can trust someone for doing something for the same reason you can have faith in someone/something, and I'm suggesting that if you attack faith that you would also be attacking trust, to a certain degree.

Ha, this is just a rewording of what you originally said.
But ok, i'll bite. Attacking faith involves attacking certain types of trust. Is there some sort of point to this, or are you just making an observation.

[blackson]

Faith is the opposite of reason, and I find myself clinging to the latter 100% of the time when I'm forced to pick between them. I respect those who can rely on faith to a point, I don't have the ability to trust in something without reason and concrete evidence. However, those who rely on faith for anything are irrational.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I respect those who can rely on faith to a point, I don't have the ability to trust in something without reason and concrete evidence.

s/ability/necessary mental deficiency/

[blue_tetris]

In other words, the problem with blind faith is that it can

But does all blind faith have to be bad?

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

The vast majority of drunk drivers are religious. COINCIDENCE?

[otters]

But does all blind faith have to be bad?

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

The vast majority of drunk drivers are religious. COINCIDENCE?

The vast majority of non-drunk-drivers are religious too! It's the whole "the US is 83% Christian" thing, see.

[jinxed_07]

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

Did this dude seriously just say that religious extremism can't have negative effects?
Excessive drinking is always bad. Religious extremism is always bad. Think about what you say.

[blackson]

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

Dave wasn't trying to say that theists are more destructive whilst under the influence of alcohol than atheists. He was just saying that more of them are involved in car accidents. Those who drink must accept the risks that come with being drunk, which is where the choice is.

[Atilla]

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

You're missing the point.

It was suggested that we should not regard blind faith negatively because it doesn't have to cause problems. I pointed out that drink driving doesn't have to cause accidents, but is still a stupid thing to do because it increases the chance of accidents. Blind faith increases the chance of people doing stupid and harmful things due to sloppy reasoning. Therefore it is, on the whole, not something we should encourage. There may be some circumstances where it is beneficial - if your family is being chased by werewolves, maybe it's better to drive drunk then to let them get eaten - but that certainly isn't enough to say that drink driving (or blind faith) is good in general.

If you prefer, we can compare it to Russian Roulette. Five times out of six, there will be no negative effect. On the sixth, someone dies.

[jean-luc]

Driving while drunk doesn't have to cause an accident but it's still not really the best idea.

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

Did this dude seriously just say that religious extremism can't have negative effects?
Excessive drinking is always bad. Religious extremism is always bad. Think about what you say.

Are you equating blind faith with religious extremism? seems like that's a jump. Maybe you don't think so, though.
I think a lot of atheists are unaware of the huge number of faithful theists that aren't extremists, because they're not the ones that turn up in the media. Remember that the vast majority of people with what you would term "blind faith" are not what you would term "religious extremists" (unless you consider any belief in theism to be extremist, but that's far beyond the general standard).

And remember that blind faith is not only applicable to religion, you can have blind faith in a substantial number of other things. Do you understand all of the things that you believe in? of course, you will argue that you have proof of them, but there are plenty of religious individuals that believe they have their own proof, in the form of personal revelation, the influence of the holy ghost, etc. By applying the concept of faith only to religion I think we miss a larger point.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Yeah but, drinking will always have negative effects after a certain amount, which makes it inaccurate to compare it to religion.

Did this dude seriously just say that religious extremism can't have negative effects?
Excessive drinking is always bad. Religious extremism is always bad. Think about what you say.

Are you equating blind faith with religious extremism? seems like that's a jump. Maybe you don't think so, though.

I was disagreeing with the disqualification of the comparison to drinking on the grounds that there was some missing similarity between taking each to an extreme.
In other words, jinxed just said that drinking to excess ends in disaster, and that taking blind faith to an extreme is somehow different.

I do not equate blind faith with religious extremism; I equate blind faith with religion. So naturally, when the conversation is about blind faith taken to an extreme, then yes, I equate extreme blind faith with religious extremism.

[SkyPanda]

Considering that so few religious types actually consider their faith to be blind, it really comes down to quality of evidence, and quality is such a subjective thing.

Do you understand all of the things that you believe in?

No, but the effort and research I put into a matter depends on how much it will affect me, and I bet it's the same for you too. For example, I believe in tigers despite only ever seeing photographs of them (which could have easily been photographs of lions with the stripes photoshopped in). But my belief in tigers doesn't really affect my life that much, which is probably why I haven't marched off to the jungles of Asia for confirmation.
Religion, on the other hand, usually has a huge effect on a person's life. I'd expect anybody who believes in some sort of deity to have acquired some decent evidence, but that often isn't the case. I think this is because when people want to believe in something, they'll take any evidence they can get. Personally, I believe that there are aliens somewhere in the universe only because I really badly want there to be.I wouldn't live my life by that, though, and I don't do things like rejecting modern medicine in favour of praying to aliens. So that's okay.

Anyway, that is one reason why a 'blind' belief in a religion is worse than say, a blind belief in tigers. Rawr.