So it’s been a while since I last posted. I’ve been busy and also didn’t really have anything organized to write about. So there, that’s my excuse.
I guess I’ll talk about #3 in the previous post. This was brought up again in a conversation I had with a friend. The key issue at hand here is this: Is it necessary to know everything possible about something in order to believe in it? That’s probably poorly worded, but it’s difficult to describe in a single sentence so I’ll give you an example.
Bill is a Christian belonging to an large and organized demonination and believes in God but doesn’t really think much about the details of his beliefs. He goes to church and prays and does all of the required stuff, but doesn’t really question why. He is certain that God is involved in all aspects of his life. Questions such as free will, the extent of God’s presence in the world, the nuances between different religions, etc are all unimportant to Bill. He just believes in God and that his belief will get him to heaven.
Is there anything wrong with Bill’s philosophy? Let’s look at another angle.
Anna is an atheist/agnostic and meets Bill. At some point the conversation turns to religion. Anna begins to drill Bill with questions about his beliefs. Bill of course can’t answer most of them since he doesn’t really know the history (other than a few bible passages and stories), motivation, or even slightly detailed theologies of the belief system he claims to adhere to.
I’m not saying Bill is necessarily wrong, but in the circumstances I just described he comes off as not invested and perhaps even unintelligent about his beliefs. If he has any evangelical hopes, this is a bit of an obstacle.
So back to the main question. If a person is to believe in something so fully and so important that it affects much of his life, ought not that person to learn everything possible about what he claims to believe?
Now comes the personal part of this post. This question struck a chord with me as a Catholic. Catholicism, if you are unaware, is deeply rooted in ritual and tradition. There are many traditions just within the mass itself that I guarantee most Catholics (myself included) do not fully understand. In fact, I am of the opinion that it is nearly impossible to understand every facet of Catholic faith without becoming a full time theologian. Now I am the kind of person who likes to understand everything that I do, at least to some extent. So being unable to necessarily know or understand all of the beliefs I subscribe to is really what caused this whole discussion.
So I think I’ve established that I don’t necessarily hold with either end of the spectrum. On one end we have nothing but the simplest possible understanding of a belief system. On the other end is the ideal state of understanding everything. So at what point in the middle is it acceptable to say you “believe” in a set of beliefs, and why?
I honestly don’t have any kind of answer to that question. I’m not sure an answer would even be appropriate. I can’t think of any sort of convincing argument one way or the other.
You should really look into Buddhist philosophy. I understand where you’re coming from, and simply exploring the ideas of a Buddhist discipline did wonder’s for my thoughts in regards to religion, which had always been really conflicted and disheartening.
I’m not a Buddhist. I just think that everyone with a serious desire to understand themselves and the world around them, beyond what others tell them is true, can benefit greatly from trying some Buddhist practices. And who knows, you may very well walk away with a reinforced structure of your previous catholic views, or you may adopt an entirely different theistic position altogether.
Or you can disregard alternative modes of thought altogether. Most people do, without even thinking about why they do.
The guy’s got a point.
Sorry for the delay, but I’ve been pretty busy lately. I appreciate your comments and agree with you to a certain extent. I am of the opinion that more knowledge is rarely a bad thing.
I have for some time wanted to explore Buddhism since I know next to nothing about it. However it is not near the top of my list of things I want to do in the near future. Gaining a better understanding of Catholicism, for instance, is something that is of greater importance to me right now.
I’m also curious what you mean by your last sentence. What do you mean when you say people disregard alternative thought without even thinking about why?
since we’re talking about beliefs, im guessing anonymous was talking about how ppl rarely seem to choose their faith (rather have it handed down to them) and then follow it blindly (as you mentioned) and disregard other “paths to heaven.”
i nvr understood why ppl think an omnipotent god would let them into heaven for blindly following “divine rules” as interpreted by fallible humans. wouldn’t such a god favor those who make conscientious choices and study their text (thus giving a curious atheist a better chance of “getting into heaven” than someone simply going through the motions?). why would an all-powerful god give a shit if ppl carried out silly ceremonies but didn’t live purely?
I’m reading this way after it was posted, but I thought it was interesting.
Faith is an interesting concept that many people, I believe, don’t understand fully. I don’t think it is “blindly following a set of beliefs.” If I have faith in a person it would be because I previously had evidence of that person coming through in past experience. I once was made fun of by an “open minded” atheist for the concept of faith in god. The ironic thing was that this atheist was very interested in politics and had great “faith” in one politician in particular, but this person would never use that word for it. It showed a jaded reaction to past experiences with those who do believe in god.
Something I do believe is that you should question even if you were brought up to believe something it doesn’t mean it’s true. Truth is not always what you want it to be, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t the truth. Complacence is the enemy of truth.