“Faith and reason are like art and science? Kinda sounds like saying that Insanity and sanity are like coffee and tea, as if its a matter of preference or something like that.”

No. It’s a matter of choice and of getting it right = get it the way you need’n'like. You CAN drink tea AND coffee at the same time, but the taste.. well..

“Just seems like using the term “faith” is like a free pass that allows you to abandon the dictionary we all agree on (somewhat), and gives you the right to ignore all common sense knowledge about biology and psychology and such (Love is faith etc).”

So nothing unusual. The “free pass” doesn’t matter in the “what” it does in the “how” though. It is not WHAT you use to justify what you do. It’s what you DO. That is what’s to look at. Again the tool thing.

“And then there’s of course the argument “You just can’t understand this, cause you don’t have faith”, which is the ultimate way to end a debate and declare yourself the winner.”
It is no argument. It’s just a phrase declaring that one isn’t right and he knows it or he has not the capapility to explain it (what also can depend on receiver’s capability and open-mindness to understand it :/ )

Love has nothing to do with faith for instance, not any more than hunger or pain anyway.

I wonder what love can be experienced without hunger, pain and all of it.. as I have known love it has all the aspects.

I’m not sure if I said that correctly. What I meant was that love as a concept is caused by the same physical factors as hunger and pain are. I.e. there is nothing transcendent in love, and almost every priest and apologist I have seen/heard have claimed there is.

Faith can contradict reason as art can contradict science.

Hm, I feel like this is exactly what I meant by saying that faith is a term used in all sorts of word plays. Faith and reason are like art and science? Kinda sounds like saying that Insanity and sanity are like coffee and tea, as if its a matter of preference or something like that.

Just seems like using the term “faith” is like a free pass that allows you to abandon the dictionary we all agree on (somewhat), and gives you the right to ignore all common sense knowledge about biology and psychology and such (Love is faith etc).

And then there’s of course the argument “You just can’t understand this, cause you don’t have faith”, which is the ultimate way to end a debate and declare yourself the winner.

I don’t. But who am I to tell them not to if they do take them one day?

> Or should all sorts of nutjobs be allowed to carry blades of their own preference around with them all the time, and have the right to distribute them to people freely?

I doubt it is our place to forbid them to do so. But if they start infecting others mind and directing their blades and those of others against freedom – that is where we should come into action

> If the term ‘abuse’ is often misused, then ‘faith’ must be the King Kong of all misused words. Love has nothing to do with faith for instance, not any more than hunger or pain anyway.

I wonder what love can be experienced without hunger, pain and all of it.. as I have known love it has all the aspects. The word/ideal may not have, but reality has.

> And if you have faith in something that there is no reason to have faith in, then the simple act of possessing something you describe as faith is certainly not a virtue.

Faith can contradict reason as art can contradict science. And still all of it exists. Strange but true. That is what I meant by the common perceived reality thing. To you it might be rediculous, to others it might be worth it. The only thing that one and the other point shares is the action.

> Or if it is, then I think that it would be just as virtuous to invent any random word, then proclaim that this word represents a virtuous aspect that you posses. Come to think of it, isn’t this pretty much how religions work in general?

And realities in general. One creates something. It represents what he wishes it to represent. He works with it. Its the same with Symbols for millenia. Or with letters of our language. Or Icons. Monuments. Buildings. Gardens. Think of it, this method is an aspect of everyday life eversince. What’s wrong with that?

> I’m not even sure I understand what the word ‘faith’ means. I guess you could say that schizophrenics have a strong faith in many things that don’t exist. Should they be considered extremely virtuous people?

No. I would call them determined. And I am not here to argue about what exists and what doesn’t. I think everyone should decide that for his own little world. Again, faith per se is a tool. A tool can not be virtuous.

> I don’t see faith as a ‘tool’ really, but I will agree that some people that confess to having a lot of faith can be described as ‘tools’.

You may not see it as a tool because you might not like the idea of using it. Or just don’t know how to and do not want to change that. To a man who does not know how to use a stick to knock on apple off the tree a stick is no tool. He can wait for the woman & serpent combo then.. Still you have it in a way I guess, but you might have other sources of inner power that you are more comfortable with. Maybe some you think you have more control over or that seem to be less misguided than faith could be. But look at this world, how many people are misguided by all the other things they use for inner power supply than faith?

> I really don’t mean to offend, if faith is something that someone feels uplifting for you then go for it. But faith, as its most often described, is a bullshit term, that is used to describe certain psychological phenomenons, as if they we’re somehow dependent religion (or spirituality or whatever). Its one of the ways religions inject themselves into subjects they actually have nothing do do with.

Yeah, but on this point most of the terms can be referred to as bullshit, because the list of misused terms is almost endless. The injection process and the lack of control is the problem. But how to get control of something noone is trained with? Almost nobody is ready for that, belief or ideology taken, to shield himself unless he knows exactly what he believes in and why and reflected enough about it to “feel” what is right for him and what isn’t. Injections are impressive because overwhelming through faith, because noone has enough experience on that issue. So far my thoughts for that.

Faith is like a blade. Hand it to a surgeon or hand it to a murderer, the blade stays the same, but the results are different. To have a “tool” is better than not to have it, that’s what life teaches us every day.

Heh, that’s a nice metaphor. You think children should be given surgeon blades? Or should all sorts of nutjobs be allowed to carry blades of their own preference around with them all the time, and have the right to distribute them to people freely? I think the metaphor works quite well.

If the term ‘abuse’ is often misused, then ‘faith’ must be the King Kong of all misused words. Love has nothing to do with faith for instance, not any more than hunger or pain anyway. And if you have faith in something that there is no reason to have faith in, then the simple act of possessing something you describe as faith is certainly not a virtue.

Or if it is, then I think that it would be just as virtuous to invent any random word, then proclaim that this word represents a virtuous aspect that you posses. Come to think of it, isn’t this pretty much how religions work in general?

I’m not even sure I understand what the word ‘faith’ means. I guess you could say that schizophrenics have a strong faith in many things that don’t exist. Should they be considered extremely virtuous people?

I don’t see faith as a ‘tool’ really, but I will agree that some people that confess to having a lot of faith can be described as ‘tools’.

I really don’t mean to offend, if faith is something that someone feels uplifting for you then go for it. But faith, as its most often described, is a bullshit term, that is used to describe certain psychological phenomenons, as if they we’re somehow dependent religion (or spirituality or whatever). Its one of the ways religions inject themselves into subjects they actually have nothing do do with.

I also agree with everything that Arnoc Grayle said. This is not evidence that religion or faith is bad, any more than the occupation of Iraq constitutes evidence that democracy is bad.

Hemant said:

However, those people sit back, saying we should respect other beliefs, and let those faiths continue to destroy lives.

OK, look, everyone knows that the JWs are very cult-like. I doubt you will find a mainline Christian, Jew, Hindu or whatever anywhere who would make the case that JW beliefs should be “respected”. However, most don’t take the time to learn what they actually believe and practice, if only because it’s hard to keep all those cults straight.

So what do you all propose? Don’t go to the next Anonymous rally, and go protest at the local Watchtower centre isntead?

Faith is like a blade. Hand it to a surgeon or hand it to a murderer, the blade stays the same, but the results are different. To have a “tool” is better than not to have it, that’s what life teaches us every day. But in cases that faith is not used to cut down other’s freedom it can be the best virtue availible to man. Given he knows to use it well. (Of course we have to dismiss the thought of a common perceived reality at this point or we can not state something that general about a tool like faith.)

And about the story.. what happens in these sects does not look like faith to me, more like fanatic entrapment and selfbrainwashing, what should sicken every freedomloving being to the core. And freedom is what it all is about, isn’t it? Sarah was very brave she got out. It’s sad that most that are drawn in or born there never will free themselves.