beleiftruthtruthbeleif

[Howie]

Yes but again: Belief and truth. So many are fixated on the two opposing each other, which is so often the topic of conversation. Those same discussions has led me to once again put the two together, parallel them, and actually realize how much in similarity they are. Cant' any fact be here one instant and not the next? Faith, in the same manner, can be present one second and not the next. Any and all of it is controlled by information processed through us. No? ~ Thoughts

[arby]

and thats the truth! or is it just belief?

[Seeker]

I believe in the force of gravity. There you go, belief and truth neatly packaged up. So many people confuse belief with faith. They are related, but are definatley not the same. Faith is a belief in something that is at the present unproven, such as God or string theory.

[Howie]

and thats the truth! or is it just belief? A statement, then a question. kinda back to where we started. I believe in the force of gravity. There you go, belief and truth neatly packaged up. So many people confuse belief with faith. They are related, but are definatley not the same. Faith is a belief in something that is at the present unproven, such as God or string theory. Yaa. Seek exactly. But a truth is only as good as the current information. Such as the string theories, which are in question because of the unknown. Could belief be viewed in the same manner? The belief theory? Belief is based upon fact derived from something, So too is gravity. If something was unveiled tomorrow to unravel this tight package we call relativity, it would be change our 'fact' of gravity. If some one has an epiphany, their fact has then changed.

[Moonbeam]

I'd sooner say faith is belief despite evidence to the contrary (I can't remember who first said that.) I wouldn't equate faith in something supernatural with an opinion of the merits of the latest theories in physics. Someone who has faith in god cannot be told or shown anything that will change their mind--that's why it's called faith. Someone who "believes" in a scientific theory will change their mind, given enough evidence. Yet I doubt any catastrophe could change your mind about God, nor logical argument, nor practically unlimited evidence to the contrary. Howie, it's just semantics. "Fact" doesn't change.

[pj]

Someone who "believes" in a scientific theory will change their mind, given enough evidence. Try telling that to those who believe that global warming is caused by human activity. When science is turned to political ends, it becomes a belief system.

[Howie]

I'd sooner say faith is belief despite evidence to the contrary (I can't remember who first said that.) I wouldn't equate faith in something supernatural with an opinion of the merits of the latest theories in physics. Someone who has faith in god cannot be told or shown anything that will change their mind--that's why it's called faith. Someone who "believes" in a scientific theory will change their mind, given enough evidence. Yet I doubt any catastrophe could change your mind about God, nor logical argument, nor practically unlimited evidence to the contrary. Howie, it's just semantics. "Fact" doesn't change. Semantics yes, But how can you say facts do not change? Thought and development along with the research, is ever changing. Often Beliefs do not change because the facts do not HAVE to change. There is no cause to look further that the believer's truth. That does not mean it is not there. Opposite that: Take for example all the secular churches. The result of interpretation or the changing of fact to the party at hand. Because of semantics and parables, along with the instinctive nature to want to belong to a group, people are bound by truth of another nature. Truth to what is preached. Power in numbers. Nobody will stand up alone and revolt and argue until they get a following behind closed doors. As a result you get you many different sects of religions all spawned from one. That is changing fact. ~To them, isn't ti?

[Moonbeam]

Try telling that to those who believe that global warming is caused by human activity. When science is turned to political ends, it becomes a belief system. I agree they've fixated on it to the exclusion of the many other detrimental results of excess consumption and population. If science isn't included in our political thinking, I'd say we're screwed. Should we replace it with religion? If someone refuses to change their mind about a scientific theory, given enough evidence to the contrary, something else is going on--like you say, politically it may make sense sometimes to deny the truth; they have something else to gain. But that is not the same as religious faith. Altho religious "faith" a lot of time is faked for the the same reasons a lot of times as well. Semantics yes, But how can you say facts do not change? Because of the definition of the word fact.

[Spartiate]

Well, belief is a human notion that is subjective and open to interpretation, whereas truth (as in "a truth") is universally constant and non-debatable (as long as the truth is actually a truth), so the two can be differentiated. Also, a belief can become a truth, but a truth can't become a belief, you can't get the answer before the question.

[Moonbeam]

You can believe something while recognizing that it may not be true. For example, I believe that my car is still in the garage and hasn't been stolen over-night, but I realize that may not be true.

[Howie]

You can believe something while recognizing that it may not be true. For example, I believe that my car is still in the garage and hasn't been stolen over-night, but I realize that may not be true. That is a very good analogy Moonbeam. reasoning and awareness. We are further defining the difference between faith and belief. Beleif, as your realization that it may NOT be there is one thing. In accordance to faith it would be there or.....disappointments or disbelief? Quote: Originally Posted by Howie Semantics yes, But how can you say facts do not change? Because of the definition of the word fact. The world was flat at one point. Do you get where I am coming from? Use your same scenario. A fact, with the realization that it is subject to change.

[pj]

What do we do with experience that cannot be objectively proved or demonstrated? To you, it is belief or faith, as you have nothing to go on but my word. To me, it is truth - truth I live by... truth I've seen with my own eyes and experienced for real. It all comes down to perspective, doesn't it? How do most of us even know that the Middle East exists, really? Unless we've been there, we don't really know. Sure, we know people who have been there, read about it, seen photos and film. In other words, we're told it is there and we believe it. If you think about it, that is how we know most things - we are told. Most of us have a certain standard that must be met before we'll buy something, but buy it we all do at some point or another. Outside of personal experience, we really don't have much truth. And that truth that each of us really has can only be accepted or known to others by belief or faith.

[Howie]

What do we do with experience that cannot be objectively proved or demonstrated? To you, it is belief or faith, as you have nothing to go on but my word. To me, it is truth - truth I live by... truth I've seen with my own eyes and experienced for real. It all comes down to perspective, doesn't it? How do most of us even know that the Middle East exists, really? Unless we've been there, we don't really know. Sure, we know people who have been there, read about it, seen photos and film. In other words, we're told it is there and we believe it. If you think about it, that is how we know most things - we are told. Most of us have a certain standard that must be met before we'll buy something, but buy it we all do at some point or another. Outside of personal experience, we really don't have much truth. And that truth that each of us really has can only be accepted or known to others by belief or faith. This seems very well orchestrated for VOTING DAY! But yes, that is true. So can we say there is NO fact?

[pj]

This seems very well orchestrated for VOTING DAY! But yes, that is true. So can we say there is NO fact? We can't. YOU can... I can... but there really is no 'we' when it comes to truth. The existence of 'fact' is in that realm.

[Spartiate]

The world was flat at one point. Do you get where I am coming from? Use your same scenario. A fact, with the realization that it is subject to change. This was a belief, not a fact . To me, facts are universal and quantifiable, like mathematical constants and geometric axioms. Also, if enough emprirical evidence is provided, a belief becomes so probable that it must be factual (our belief that the Earth is round for instance). What do we do with experience that cannot be objectively proved or demonstrated? To you, it is belief or faith, as you have nothing to go on but my word. To me, it is truth - truth I live by... truth I've seen with my own eyes and experienced for real. It all comes down to perspective, doesn't it? How do most of us even know that the Middle East exists, really? Unless we've been there, we don't really know. Sure, we know people who have been there, read about it, seen photos and film. In other words, we're told it is there and we believe it. If you think about it, that is how we know most things - we are told. Most of us have a certain standard that must be met before we'll buy something, but buy it we all do at some point or another. Outside of personal experience, we really don't have much truth. And that truth that each of us really has can only be accepted or known to others by belief or faith. Well, in a sense, all of our knowledge is conveyed to us indirectly. You know the Middle-East exists because a map "told" you it is there. If you went to the Middle-East, you would know it existed because you would see it or because you would talk to its inhabitants, feel its soil... In other words, your senses would tell you that it existed. But if you question that being told that something exists, either by a map or by your senses (and we all know that our senses can be deceived...), is not enough to convince you of its veracity, then you are basically (potentially) denying all knowledge. In this scenario, the only real "truths" would be the knowledge that is innate to us, which would be nothing, which we know is impossible, since we know that there are universal, undebateble truths. Belief is subjective, fact/truth is not.

[Howie]

This was a belief, not a fact . To me, facts are universal and quantifiable, like mathematical constants and geometric axioms. Also, if enough emprirical evidence is provided, a belief becomes so probable that it must be factual (our belief that the Earth is round for instance).. Belief is subjective, fact/truth is not. Is that a fact? How to prove this? What I am saying is at that point in history it was fact to them that it was flat. Not too long ago atoms were the smallest particle, I ]thought the atom was the smallest particle, then they found electrons and protons. Then quarks and gluons. quarks are probably made out of something and so on. Is this cycle infinite? Im guessing eventually you will end up with pure energy. There are multiple examples of changing fact. New technological advances provide this. It's fact.

[Spartiate]

Is that a fact? How to prove this? Well, take a simple geometric axiom, Pythagoras' theorem for instance. In a right triangle, the square of the hypotenuse will allways equal the sum of the squares of the two remaining sides. This is true no matter if you are American, Russian, Chinese, German, Atlantean or Martian; it is undebateable, it is universal, it is fact. I see what you're getting at, how we can be stubborn enough to believe that we have everything figured out, only to have our views changed a few decades later. Yet to me, your examples are just those, beliefs, not facts. Our beliefs change with time, but facts cannot, they existed long before any man thought them up. Now there are some things, like I said, that have such high probabilities of being true, that they become factual (I gave the sphericity of the Earth as an example), yet they still remain beliefs in theory. On a sidenote, as we progress, we are starting to realise more and more that we still have a lot to figure out, that each new answer brings about many new questions. The ancient Greeks thought they had conquered science, 18th century scientists thought that physics was a done deal. These days, we've realised that what we have discovered pales in comparison to what is left, which makes us a little less cocky and a little more open minded from a scientific point of view.

[Howie]

Well, take a simple geometric axiom, Pythagoras' theorem for instance. In a right triangle, the square of the hypotenuse will allways equal the sum of the squares of the two remaining sides. This is true no matter if you are American, Russian, Chinese, German, Atlantean or Martian; it is undebateable, it is universal, it is fact. I see what you're getting at, how we can be stubborn enough to believe that we have everything figured out, only to have our views changed a few decades later. Yet to me, your examples are just those, beliefs, not facts. Our beliefs change with time, but facts cannot, they existed long before any man thought them up. Now there are some things, like I said, that have such high probabilities of being true, that they become factual (I gave the sphericity of the Earth as an example), yet they still remain beliefs in theory. On a sidenote, as we progress, we are starting to realise more and more that we still have a lot to figure out, that each new answer brings about many new questions. The ancient Greeks thought they had conquered science, 18th century scientists thought that physics was a done deal. These days, we've realised that what we have discovered pales in comparison to what is left, which makes us a little less cocky and a little more open minded from a scientific point of view. Yes, I see what you are saying. Good explanation. Nature, all included, man/woman, world, universe, is in existence, what it is. Long before we've gotten here and long before we will be gone. The quanta realm may be the only exception, as for inconstancy.

[Howie]

Truth Belief is the death of thought. Tractatus Magnus Opus - Language is not Transcendental

[O'nus]

I see why you directed me here, Howie. It is basically the same discussion. I will try to explain my point of view very simply: Nature - How something is. The nature of Me is that I am human and my name is Michael. The nature of gravity is that it is a force that pulls objects towards it (followed by a plethora of evidence.. but lets just assume that we understand gravity completely. Thus, we understand the nature of gravity). Fact - Concepts we hold as the nature of things in order to understand our world and how it functions. Facts are still subject to being false as there may be other alternatives (truths) to explaining the concept. ie. we thought it was fact that the earth was flat, but it was wrong. Beliefs - Concepts we hold as the potential nature of things but do not have necessary grounds to support or prove it. Faith: Can be two things; - The degree of which we hold our beliefs to be the nature of things. - Loyalty or traditions held in relevance to our beliefs. (ie. our faith dictates that I pray every day, etc.) (This definition is subject to be dropped and simply left with the former). Truth: - The emergence from ignorance - The revalation of deception (Those of you who read my other thread.. you knew that was coming ) + This is when our facts or beliefs are wrong and there are other alternatives/truths to understand the nature of things. What do you think...? ~

[Universal Mind]

It depends on what the definition of "is" is.

[pj]

It depends on what the definition of "is" is. Amen. Nothing more to be said here.

[Howie]

It depends on what the definition of "is" is. It is what it is? Through out these several similar topics, I have concluded in my mind, what is, is!! Yes Amen. Nothing more to be said here.