Just like the Rainbow between the Mist and Sun, it feels like I'm trapped between two worlds. - Hammerfall-Between Two Worlds
Captain Cynic Guides
Administrative Contact
Talk Talk
Philosophy Forum
Religion Forum
Psychology Forum
Science & Technology Forum
Politics & Current Events Forum
Health & Wellness Forum
Sexuality & Intimacy Forum
Product Reviews
Stories & Poetry Forum
Art Forum
Movie/TV Reviews
Jokes & Games
Photos, Videos & Music Forum

Faith: innate or not?

User Thread
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
Faith: innate or not?
A common pattern always plays out it seems when ever "faith" in the religious sense is discussed. It almost always ends up that the participants begin to try and convince the other of the validity and truths behind their faiths. I fall into this category as much as anyone for the temptation to get the other person to see your point of view is strong and hard to resist. It even becomes more important at times then the topic itself as the debate heats up. I think a large part of this is because of assumed premises that cause one of the participants to set up confining perimeters to the conversation. Then as the premise and perimeters are confronted or challenged the discussion soon deteriates.

But is that where we go wrong? The 'convincing' part I mean? I long sensed realized that I could never 'convince' say a staunch atheist of the existence of God. But is trying to convince atheists of the validity of faith in God vain as well? What I mean by validity is the rationale behind it.

And that brings me to the question I'd like to pose. Keep in mind that I'm not looking for debate here but rather some insight. Is faith an innate part of the human experience? I've heard it said in past discussions how babies are born 'atheists' and taught faith. My problem with that is I believe babies have no concept of it whether in the positive or negative. So how can the negative be assumed? And back in time if faith isn't innate, how would such a concept arise? It's seems to be a hard sell if the first person who had faith in God just wanted to invent a scam that he had no chance of producing. What do you think?

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
[  Edited by manbible at   ]
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
I think I understand what you're saying. Like in your scenario with the dice, the person when faced with what reality had dealt him; his "coping mechanism" may kick in as so he would say "fate" was against me. Choosing to believe though the odds were in his favor, because he lost he must of never had a chance to begin with because of who he was. Thus putting his faith in "fate." And doing so because of the environment (losing everything) that he brought upon himself. Would that be a fair assessment of your analysis?

If so, how did this "coping mechanism" originate? Meaning; did his mind invent it on the spot or was it innate? Because if it was an on the spot phenomenon, then like we both have suggested, it just wouldn't make sense that he would reach to a god or invent a Satan. And as I relate your analysis to faith of a religious sort and look at mans beginnings, though he would have less understanding of the world he observes then we do, it still would not make sense for him to say, "God did it." Mainly because there is no reason to believe they had put themselves in the kind of situations you describe as possible triggers for the "coping mechanisms." They were just observing nature around them. Which brings me back to my original thoughts. How and why would the "God" concept originate in humanity? Could it be an innate part of us?

And thanks for the interesting response. It certainly did provoke thought.

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
In theory it could have gone down that way. But it's not really a definitive answer. For one because one can easily theorize that the same intellect would prevent them from seeking an answer that would not solve their immediate problems on hand. Secondly, it can be theorized that the intellect of others who are successful would never buy into the "hexed' explanations of those who are inadequate. Then, for those who have been exiled would still need to survive. Eventually it would be logical to assume they have gained some degree of the same successes as them who exiled them based on the fact they survived.

But that's the problem with your hypothesis and my comments concerning it. It's theory. We really don't know. I'm beginning to believe at this point in time in human history we are not going to reach a definitive answer. Though I acknowledge the possible probabilities behind your scenarios as well my thoughts on them, we just haven't the ability to arrive at an appropriately conclusive answer. I'm not saying your answer is wrong, or has no element of truth. I'm just saying it's a tough question to answer definitively.

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
Where are you coming from???? My gosh!! Are you this angry just because I didn't take your answer as the answer of all answers? Come on.

I assumed your coping mechanism was the answer to your hypothetical cavemans possible feelings of inadquency because of the variance you outlined.

It never crossed my mind you would take it the way you did. I actually was enjoying your insight, till now that is.

Your hatred of Christianity is irrational.
Perhaps your mechanism for coping with the environment you've created, eh?

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
In any event Decius, I was looking for insight regardless of my or anyone's predisposition. How you could make the blanket accusations you did I'll never know. But I never tried to hide my beliefs our my ultimate faith.

I truly believe the answer can not be answered by human means. But thoughts on it I thought would be interesting and they were, at first.

And there was no arguments for you to destroy. They were just thoughts. Really, you take yourself too seriously.

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
 60yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that manbible is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
quote:
You have been given an almost irrefutable answer to your question


Okay, I'm going to forgo you emotional outburst for now and pulverize your "irrefutable answer" since I had no idea you entered this as a debate. And narcissism that leads to blind ignorance shouldn't go unchecked, at least not in good conscience. And since your emotional charge caused me to look again at your scenario, I have no shame in reevaluating my previous opinion.

1. The variance you suggest is illogical from the start. If the successful brother comes back with food consistently then the variance of the food "not being there" is nonexistent and your premise is faulty.

2. For exiled nomads to meet up and tell of their experiences in the manor you suggest, seeing, a wolf, feeling wind, looking at trees and then deciding those things were "otherworldly" experiences because they couldn't hunt and so they unanimously give rise to a 'God' concept is ludicrous. The successful caveman could have just as easily used the variances in your scenario as a positive and said "the gods favor me."

3. 99% of people do exactly as I alluded to when I said logic dictates they would search for an answer that will solve their immediate problem. We see it everyday in life. I've been through it myself. Someone gets rejected at a job interview. I'ts been going on for more then a week or two. He begins to feel as though the world is against him. He makes excuses that are bogus but yet make him feel better about himself. The reality of hunger causes him to examine himself more objectively and realizes the negativity is coming from him. Everyone he meets is confident they should get the job at the interviews but he isn't and realizes it shows. He works on his attitude and in days he lands a job.

The caveman realizes the variances that are causing his hunger isn't the wolf, the wind or the lack of prey. Its in his individual ability to apply the same skills of hunting as his brother. So he looks at himself to see what he is doing different and corrects it. We call it " pulling ourselves up by the bootstraps." To think that people create an excuse and starve is the epitome of naivety.

quote:
I think it's very selfish to ask questions and continue discussions in a seemingly open manner to trick people into addressing your questions logically, all the while having an agenda in your mind.


quote:
This seems to be how smiling door-to-door Christian salesmen operate, which is why they are so readily detested.

This is the purety of faith? Torture logical people until they can no longer cope with reality?


And you have the gall to say I have an agenda? And I suppose the logical fallacy of a scenario riddled with holes is reality to you?

quote:
And regardless of what you say or do in here, the truth is, you and I both know it has threatened it, has shaken it, and causes you to squirm emotionally.


Ah, no. But I do wish you a peaceful existence.

| Permalink
"To love oneself is to love others."
Faith: innate or not?
  1  
About Captain Cynic
Common FAQ's
Captain Cynic Guides
Contact Us
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
General Forum Rules
Cynic Trust Levels
Administrative Contact Forum
Registration
Lost Password
General Discussion
Philosophy Forums
Psychology Forums
Health Forums
Quote Submissions
Promotions & Links
 Captain Cynic on Facebook
 Captain Cynic on Twitter
 Captain Cynic RSS Feed
 Daily Tasker
Copyright © 2011 Captain Cynic All Rights Reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy