jump to navigation

secular disguise but faith base November 28, 2007

Posted by mmaarrccuuss in Foto Blogging, Musing, Photography.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

science is known to be reliable because it is base on testable hypotheses? But the fundamentals are conceptualize base on assumptions. For eg Law of Physics- gravitational and eletro- magnestism. Hence, it is basically faith base. (ST 27/11, p26)

likwise for religion, having belief without evidence is a virtue which i want my child to have.

finally, business is also a faith base. all the planning and forecast will only bring you so far. it is faith and desire that differentiate you from success and failure

Changi Chapel

Comments»

1. spudd - December 4, 2007

Dude, its a fancy theory but one should then question the categorization of faith. Extreme examples can be used to exemplify how a line can be seen.

A castle under siege. Dead bodies lying everywhere. Diseases bound to spread and kill the rest of the people. King decides to burn the bodies. Pastor disapproves because it is blasphemy. What would you have done? Would you obey the religion (man made/god made?) or stick to what logic God ought to comprehend.

Do you believe in the ultimate truth? How do we get there? Can we constantly attempt to better our morality? The avenues of science through physics, mathematics, are they for real? 1+1 is not equal to 2? Are there more colours than in the rainbow? What is the probability of it being unreal?

Just like Fuxy’s response on my blog post about human rights, you know you had this one coming. Its a balancing out. We can turn the title around and say “Faith disguise but secular base”, a sociological analysis of religions in man’s history.

At the end of the day, I totally agree that everything is faith-based. However, “having belief without evidence is a virtue which i want my child to have” is something I cannot comprehend. I’d like my child to think carefully and subscribe to choices based on varying degrees of evidences that then leads to committing faith. His statements are problematic because it stops us from thinking critically. Something we ought to do if we’d want a better world. Don’t you?

2. mmaarrccuuss - December 4, 2007

precisely. u hit the nail on the head.

i would want my son/daughter to do that. however, i will not force it down on them whether to believe in (religion). Thats what happened to me. My parents are perfectly fine with me not going church.

however, during the formative years of a child. how do we articulate that point to them- critical thinking? i dont think its possible. critical thinking and fact finding is something u assimilate and progress in time. i dont want to stress them at such a young age. romanticizing the story of god is a good way to explain the notion of faith. what do u think?

3. spudd - December 5, 2007

I feel your perspective now. I just felt the writer’s statement can be easily viewed by many in the wrong way.

I’m down with my child becoming a Christian or whatever if he knows for himself what’s best. As for his early years, thats a tough one. Last week, a mother asked me if eating is allowed in the study room. I told her its ok if you don’t dirty the place. There was a no eating sign and the kid shouted “It says no eating here!” So how? Part of me wanted to explain to her that following the impetus of that rule is most important, yet, I knew it would be difficult.

But just because it is difficult, does it mean I should not pursue …..?

But still very difficult la … you have a point …