|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Certainty, Doubt and Questioning
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
In the IngoB hell thread, there arose a tangent of the values of certitude, doubt and questioning.
My stand is that one should question ones beliefs always. If one's faith/belief is solid, it can survive questions.
Certainty can be weakness. It ends learning.
This is not to say one should wander empty, with no core belief.
With no questions, there would be no Reformation. There would be no Christianity.
So, questioning: Good or Bad?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Several years ago someone painted "Question Authority" on a side door to out church. Little did the person know that we always question authority in our congregation--not in a bad way, but when your congregation is made up of academics and scientists, it continues to question. Makes for a interesting pastorate for those willing to take on the assignment.
Someone said doubt is not the enemy of faith, it is certainty; because, as you say, certainty does not allow for growth.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I think it is about learning (mathetes, generally translated at disciple has the meaning of learner, pupil, follower.)
It is generally recognised that Christian discipleship is lifelong; we never stop learning about God, ourselves, how to live, how to love. We may learn both through questioning and obedience. We internalise what we have heard, or discovered, or experienced. Without the capacity to revisit our own internalisations, the insight into whether we are truly convinced about anything, or rather "take it on authority", we don't actually know what we believe about anything.
I think the human problem is a genuine reluctance to admit error, the possibility that our insights are imperfect. Particularly when we have invested a lot in building that which we have learned. The antidote to that is humility.
It is not easy to live this way. To be humble before the facts, their significance, our limitations and imperfections, requires a deep level of personal honesty and awareness. Often enough, there is or seems to be an imperative to speak and act without being sure that we've got things right.
Bob Dylan has this phrase in "It's alright, ma" that comes to mind at this point.
"He who is not busy being born is busy dying". Is learning a process of "busy being born"? I think it might be.
A central Christian concept, that of being "born from above" or "born again", illuminates the issue. We say that when we stop learning we start dying. Open minds must close on something, I suppose, but if we are wise, we must be very careful not to bolt and bar the door.
I think Christian humility must involve taking our ignorance seriously, as well as being grateful for the meaning and value we have discovered in our discipleship. A friend mentioned to me an observation by a Baptist minister he knew well. The pastor had said "I believe less than I did, but I believe more deeply that which I do believe".
There's something very important there. Structures of belief may be very impressive, but if we become proud of them and our facility in understanding them, we may be worshiping an idol. That is never wise.
[ 08. December 2013, 07:18: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
As the person who dropped the apostle St Thomas into that Hell thread* for his doubt, and then couldn't come back into the thread until the discussion had moved on significantly, I guess I ought to clarify my thoughts. Now I'm able to check, what I was thinking of was the centurion's prayer "Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!" not the prayer of St Thomas: "My Lord and my God!", both of which I was taught as personal prayers at moments when words don't come.
There are so many Biblical examples of doubt that it seems to be a natural part of faith, but there are so many Christians who decry doubt and uncertainty.
Surely we know from the Bible that God's voice is difficult to hear, we have to wait for the still small voice and enter into a conversation to give ourselves a chance to hear it. And we also know that there are many false prophets, so is a scepticism in face of certainty that ridiculous?
Barnabas62, thank you for your thoughts - lots to reflect on.
* I so should not post on my phone on my commute to work - I can't check properly and I then have hours of not being able to respond further.
[ 08. December 2013, 07:58: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
MrsBeaky
Shipmate
# 17663
|
Posted
I think there is a lot of influence brought to bear on this question by both stages of life and personality and as we change and grow things can shift for us.
After years of trying to conform myself to the minutiae of certainty, I set sail in a fragile boat on a ocean of doubt and questioning.It was scary but it was exhilarating too as I learned to trust more deeply in the God, about whom I was far less certain as regards some details...
There then came a turning point for me. I remember reading in a book by Kallistos Ware something which I found utterly liberating. He said that a mature faith was one which was constantly dying and being reborn.
Those words of Jesus about the seed dying suddenly became vibrant and clear.
--------------------
"It is better to be kind than right."
http://davidandlizacooke.wordpress.com
Posts: 693 | From: UK/ Kenya | Registered: Apr 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Very nice phrase that, Mrs B. one's faith dying and being reborn.
I've always found certainty in others frightening and incomprehensible. That applies both to theists and atheists.
I suppose it can also become dangerous, in the sense that the person who is certain, might start to think that others are certainly wrong, and then who knows. But this is not inevitable.
[ 08. December 2013, 09:19: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwalchmai
Shipmate
# 17802
|
Posted
Doubts - huge doubts - are part of the reason that I am on board the Ship.
I was born into a Christian family - my father was an Anglican priest - so I have been going to church, on and off, all my life. Dragged along as a child and with varying degrees of enthusiasm ever since.
I began to think that what serious theologians understand about the faith is not the simplistic interpretations dished out Sunday by Sunday in so many churches.
Eventually I asked a priest if he could explain the atonement in rational terms that do not require a bloodthirsty vengeful deity who will only forgive if a human being is killed as a sacrifice. He replied, regretfully, that he could not. At that point I more or less stopped going to church and became a "Christmas, weddings & funerals" churchgoer.
Time passed and a new priest came to our parish - a charismatic man of deep faith (I do not use "charismatic" in the sense used in evangelical churches). I plucked up the courage to ask the question again. He did not come up with a smart answer but was prepared to engage with my doubts and made me welcome in church even though I do not pretend to believe all the doctrines set out in the creed. He has since started a discussion group for those of us with doubts, a surprising number of whom have come out of the woodwork.
At about the same time I joined the Ship and have found the discussions here helpful in thinking through my own questions and doubts.
Posts: 133 | From: England | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Gwalchmai
I did something similar, but I said to a rector, do you think atonement could mean at-one-ment, and he laughed, and said why not, that is its oldest meaning, so I set sail on the sea of doubt.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwalchmai:
Eventually I asked a priest if he could explain the atonement in rational terms that do not require a bloodthirsty vengeful deity who will only forgive if a human being is killed as a sacrifice. He replied, regretfully, that he could not.
Years ago I asked God to give me one reason that I could understand why Jesus had to die. A few days later I found an idea in my head.
If Jesus had stayed up in heaven, he could have overruled death; he could overcome it only if it could happen to him. He died so that we could follow him.
I am not saying that this should satisfy anyone else. I am suggesting that if you want to understand something, you should ask God for help. Prayers of this type have never failed for me.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
His Consciousness is here and up the road. It always has been. Waiting for us to catch up. Atonement theories from before the atonement are OURS. They improve with suffering. OURS.
NOTHING in Love requires punishment. As someone's sig says here, we are punished by our sins, not for them. And we are innocent in that. Not good, not pure, human nature isn't good, but it can be enlightened, it senses goodness, aspires to it.
Inspired by another's quote from this:
Mustapha
If Nature did not take delight in blood,
She would have made more easy ways to good.
We that are bound by vows and by promotion,
With pomp of holy sacrifice and rites,
To teach belief in good and still devotion,
To preach of heaven's wonders and delights —
Yet, when each of us in his own heart looks,
He finds the God there far unlike his books.
Oh wearisome condition of Humanity!
Born under one law, to another bound,
Vainly begot and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound:
What meaneth Nature by these diverse laws?
Passion and reason self-division cause.
Is it the mask or majesty of Power
To make offences that it may forgive?
Fulke Greville, 1st Baron Brooke (1609)
I'm always ignorantly astounded by how nothing is new under the sun.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Those who were all set to stone the woman caught in adultery were certain they were doing God's work until Jesus compelled them to question their motives.
Obviously faith in God can be clouded by a constant wallowing in questioning and doubt . Having said that, I get a feeling the the kind of absolute certainty that says -- I'm right and everyone else is wrong -- tends to please the other Bloke much more than it pleases God.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
As ever, it's not a matter of either/or, but of both/and, or so istm.
We lay down in our minds those things we're sure of. If we didn't, we would no longer be able to use language, add up, or walk. We build on what we already know for sure, it becomes our foundation. We begin to question what we've been told quite early, as others play tricks on us, and so we should develop a healthy scepticism which questions. As we do so, there are some things we'll reject, some we'll leave open, and some we trust sufficiently to lay down as truth.
To use Biblical analogies: Christ is the cornerstone, the foundation on which we build, once we have laid down as truth that the living Christ is real and worth following. The more this is affirmed within our lifetime relationship with him, the stronger and healthier the foundation is. It might also be compared to a tree growing from a seed and laying down roots.
The problem is that we often attach images and traits to personalities, and we might do this to Christ. I remember someone becoming quite upset when I said that no-one knew what Jesus looked like. He was sure that Jesus must be the long-haired man with soft features he had seen portrayed in art so often. In the same way, some attach Christ to the words of the Bible in a fixed way, so that any question as to the historical accuracy of a story might shake the foundation of an individual's faith. I was challenged by a sceptic who had been watching 'The Bible' series on TV. He thinks that its stories are great, but wonders why it doesn't turn me away from the very idea of faith 'as it couldn't possibly have happened that way.'
My reply that it makes no difference to my relationship with the living Christ, that I can gain insights from the stories about God and the way human beings relate with him whether or not they happened that way, was met with incredulity.
So yes, we question with prayer, and through this we build on the foundations, those things we are sure of. That's the way our faith grows, and that's the way the kingdom of God grows, like a tiny seed that becomes over time a massive tree. Some leaves and branches must die, so that others grow, and the fruit is shared freely so that new seed will be laid down.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
I'm always ignorantly astounded by how nothing is new under the sun.
I'll raise your Fulke Greville:
Oh Thou, who didst with pitfall and with gin
Beset the Road I was to wander in,
Thou will not with Predestin'd Evil round
Enmesh me, and impute my Fall to Sin?
Omar Khayyam sometime before about 1130 CE
But on the original topic, it may be worth distinguishing doubts about our understanding from those about the objects of our understanding.
One solution to the problem of suffering is to decide God doesn't exist, another is to keep your belief but doubt whether you understand God.
Deciding that things you believe in don't exist is often psychologically much more difficult than keeping the belief and looking for a different interpretation. We seem much more able to accept that there may be different ways of seeing things than that what we are seeing may not really be there.
I appreciate the difference isn't always so clear cut.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tortuf
Ship's fisherman
# 3784
|
Posted
Certainty was the enemy of my belief for a long time. My certainty about who god* is was the reason for my doubt about God.
To my way of thinking anyone who imagines they know all about God has reduced God to a construction of them-self writ large. For me, at least, the God who created the Universe and who caused physics to work in ways that generations of our best minds cannot begin to fathom is beyond our ability to understand.
A God who is not understandable may be a bit scary for some people. We have deep within us a need to understand things. So, we posit God from what God has given us. That means we might read texts that we believe to be divinely inspired like the Bible, or the Daode jing, or the Quran.
Some of us look to the teachings of those who have gone before us who had great faith and who sought and strived to understand God. Although the teachings of some, like Marcion of Sinope, have gone out of fashion.
Prayer and meditation are the tools I use to bring myself closer to God now.** Having used those methods I no longer doubt the existence of God, even as I no longer believe I can understand God.
_________
* In case there is any question, the use of the small g in the word god means I am not referring to: God, Adonai, YHWH, Immanuel.
** I am starting a thread on using the Bible and Tradition to check the validity of beliefs to try and prevent this thread from being derailed.
Posts: 6963 | From: The Venice of the South | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
Deciding that things you believe in don't exist is often psychologically much more difficult than keeping the belief and looking for a different interpretation. We seem much more able to accept that there may be different ways of seeing things than that what we are seeing may not really be there.
Moving from one side to the other is probably quite difficult for most people, true. But atheism seems to offer much more certainty than religion. I presume there's only one way not to believe in God, whereas there are many ways to approach believing in him. After all, the diversity of religious thought is one reason some atheists give for rejecting religion, their argument being that the various different ideas can't all be right, therefore they're probably all wrong.
I see faith as a very murky process rather than a static thing, so that argument isn't very useful to me. Atheism is far too final and certain for the likes of me, even if all I have instead is a a confused Christian faith!
[ 08. December 2013, 13:34: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
I think for the most part this discussions fails, because people do not understand (or perhaps admit to themselves) what they are really doing. There is no "doubt" or "questioning" without some other certainty, it just does not work that way. As soon as you say "this or that may be wrong" you are implicitly (if not explicitly) making an appeal to some other thing in your mind that is held certain. It is mentally impotent to purely doubt, a mere formality of the mind; unless your mind brings other knowledge, reason or sentiment to bear that is not under question itself. Your mind has to have some kind of "because" for the doubt, or it will remain vacuous and ineffective.
You can go Cartesian on this, and try to doubt every bit of your mental inventory by appeal to other bits, until you run out of stuff. Then, so Descartes says, you are at least left with yourself, because you cannot doubt your own being as doubter. But this is as such rather pointless, a kind of showing off just how far you can push the envelope. Nobody, neither Descartes nor anybody else, actually works that way. You certainly do not doubt everything except yourself, and I'm pretty sure that even in writing down that claim Descartes pressed a pen with ink against paper, in the sure expectation that that would create meaningful signs for communication.
The truth is that we all have "operational certainty" about a good many things. From the 3D structure of space to government imposing taxes, it is a diverse grab bag of things. That one can make theoretical distinctions between these in terms of "how certain they really are" does not mean that the mind has any significant doubt in executing on them. There would have to be a serious external challenge first, something that directly attacks these operational certainties and cannot be resolved, before they become practically questionable.
But then we come to faith, and faith is different beast from other modes of establishing operational certainty. The 3D nature of space is imposed undeniably by the senses, and taxation by government agents in our experience. But faith is primarily established by a motion of the individual's will, by a personal decision, in the absence of objective intellectual inevitability. However, this absence of a compelling pro case is usually accompanied by the absence of a compelling contra case. The will can impose a non-intellectual decision precisely because the intellect cannot decide. Of course one could be mistaken, but faith that has survived for some centuries against inevitable criticism is unlikely to be killed by intellectual argument. So as far as faith is concerned, we basically end up with a series of operational certainties established by the force of will, which are largely impervious to critique.
This is where we are at. This is where everybody who has any faith is at. As far as faith is concerned, everybody has some list of operational certainties established primarily by will power. What happens next, at least on SoF and for Christianity, is a kind of inverse dick length comparison. People basically tell each other "Look, mine is shorter, I win." One can always doubt one more thing on the list of operational certainties of faith somebody else has. But that really is quite meaningless as such, and "better faith" cannot be established merely by such elimination.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I presume there's only one way not to believe in God, whereas there are many ways to approach believing in him.
That's a good point, though I also see life as a process in which we are often unsure what we should do/believe. Religion provides one framework and often a very good one. If you don't believe in God you need some other set of beliefs of some sort to get you through your life. Going from believing in God to not seems to me to make everything uncertain.
You could, very naturally, say you don't believe in God in order to have a guide to life but rather because God exists. And you could well be right, and me be wrong.
Like quetzalcoatl quote:
I've always found certainty in others frightening and incomprehensible. That applies both to theists and atheists.
And I get worryingly certain that other people's certainties aren't as certain as they seem.
Hence my catch phrase below.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
When it comes to faith in God I am uncertain about everything.
But that doesn't mean I have no faith in God. My faith has a lot more connection with trust than knowledge.
As in a marriage - you can never be certain your partner is faithful, but you can trust them implicitly.
I trust that God exists/is loving/is merciful etc. I don't know it and could never prove it.
Nope - it's not a dick comparison exercise for me, I know exactly how short mine is ![[Biased]](wink.gif) . But the clitoris is 40,000 times more sensitive than the penis and can orgasm multiple times, so how's that for a comparison?
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Clitoris-envy everywhere.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
The truth is that we all have "operational certainty" about a good many things.
I agree entirely - though I tend to have 'operational beliefs' as they rarely make it to operational certainties.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Gwalchmai
I did something similar, but I said to a rector, do you think atonement could mean at-one-ment, and he laughed, and said why not, that is its oldest meaning, so I set sail on the sea of doubt.
At the risk of provoking a tangent (albeit a relevant one) - I found that a bit weird! What other meaning is it supposed to have?
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Gwalchmai
I did something similar, but I said to a rector, do you think atonement could mean at-one-ment, and he laughed, and said why not, that is its oldest meaning, so I set sail on the sea of doubt.
At the risk of provoking a tangent (albeit a relevant one) - I found that a bit weird! What other meaning is it supposed to have?
Reparation?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Mmm - reparation is just about repairing things which you may have to do to be at one with someone. The word apparently comes from an obsolete use of the verb "to one" - onement as a word existed before at-onement (according to the OED at least).
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I obviously haven't suffered enough as suffering doesn't make me doubt Love in the slightest. In fact it confirms it. Love is so great it allows for unimaginable 'freedom' or rather possibility of contingent suffering. Just like an uncreated creation would. And impossibly fixes it.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Mmm - reparation is just about repairing things which you may have to do to be at one with someone. The word apparently comes from an obsolete use of the verb "to one" - onement as a word existed before at-onement (according to the OED at least).
Well, reparation (or making amends, I suppose) is not synonymous with 'being at one with', although, as you say, it may be a means of achieving it.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Mmm - reparation is just about repairing things which you may have to do to be at one with someone. The word apparently comes from an obsolete use of the verb "to one" - onement as a word existed before at-onement (according to the OED at least).
Well, reparation (or making amends, I suppose) is not synonymous with 'being at one with', although, as you say, it may be a means of achieving it.
Indeed, as you say it is not synonymous, but most usage involves the concepts together side by side, and I guess one has bled over into the other in understanding there. No pun intended.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Mmm - reparation is just about repairing things which you may have to do to be at one with someone. The word apparently comes from an obsolete use of the verb "to one" - onement as a word existed before at-onement (according to the OED at least).
Well, reparation (or making amends, I suppose) is not synonymous with 'being at one with', although, as you say, it may be a means of achieving it.
Indeed, as you say it is not synonymous, but most usage involves the concepts together side by side, and I guess one has bled over into the other in understanding there. No pun intended.
Well, there are other versions of at-one-ment, for example, via self-abandonment, found in quite a number of the mystics. I suppose self-abandonment may actually involve some kind of reparation, since if I let go of my own stuff, I am handing it over to be redeemed. More bleeding.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Actually I was going to post some stuff on middle-eastern hospitality and the need for atonement in hospitality (in the broad sense of atonement) but I sense the beady eye of a host fixed on my neck! But yes, I agree there are multiple contexts that don't involve repairing things.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Nope - it's not a dick comparison exercise for me, I know exactly how short mine is . But the clitoris is 40,000 times more sensitive than the penis and can orgasm multiple times, so how's that for a comparison?
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Clitoris-envy everywhere.
I would question that quetzalcoatl .
40,000 times more sensitive than what I've already got ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
I almost certain a fellow wouldn't get much done in a day with one of those .
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Doubt and questioning are neither good nor bad just inevitable. Certainty is different entirely. A certain amount of questioning is wise. Too much leads to existential paralysis.
Taking questioning and doubt to its logical extreme would mean expressing a certain degree of uncertainty about the sun rising tomorrow. Most of us aren't the least bit uncertain about that. We certainly don't live our lives based on that uncertainty. Some of us make fun of such people.
Where does religion fall in all that? I admit to a degree of uncertainty about the truth of my beliefs. Sure. But, I live my life as if I was certain.
To what degree is continuous questioning about religion helpful? Yes, we never know if we are exactly right. However, we can never know for sure if we are wrong. Upon examining what we believe, we might discard all the right things we believe, keep only the wrong beliefs, and not realize we are doing it. Changing beliefs comes through privileging some theories of knowing over others. All that means is faith in one epistemology over the other.
I've noticed two main reasons offered for doubting orthodox Christianity. One is theodicy. Two is that Christianity appears irrational. Frankly, I don't see how you can accept evolution and a universe that is billions of years old and still have problems with theodicy. God's mean? Yeah, tell it to the dinosaurs. We complain when people die a few decades earlier than we think they should. What is a few decades when we are talking about billions and billions of years?
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Clitoris-envy everywhere.
I would question that quetzalcoatl .
40,000 times more sensitive than what I've already got
I almost certain a fellow wouldn't get much done in a day with one of those .
Which just goes to show how very strong minded women everywhere are!
(sorry, hosts, I will desist now, just to say - I didn't start it!)
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I think for the most part this discussions fails, because people do not understand (or perhaps admit to themselves) what they are really doing. There is no "doubt" or "questioning" without some other certainty, it just does not work that way. As soon as you say "this or that may be wrong" you are implicitly (if not explicitly) making an appeal to some other thing in your mind that is held certain.
ISTM, this is an overly simplistic view. Far to Black and White.
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
It is mentally impotent to purely doubt, a mere formality of the mind; unless your mind brings other knowledge, reason or sentiment to bear that is not under question itself. Your mind has to have some kind of "because" for the doubt, or it will remain vacuous and ineffective.
Of course this is some reason for doubt, this remains true even should one fail to replace the doubted with a certainty.
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
The truth is that we all have "operational certainty" about a good many things. From the 3D structure of space
Actually that is at least four dimensions. And we see this because we question. Yes, there are basic things we are certain of, but there is a value to questioning this. Think of this next time you use a sat-nav.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
quote:
So, questioning: Good or Bad?
Depends, doesn't it?
In the case of my previous religion (JW's) the doubts came my way and I believe it is foolish to ignore significant objections to one's faith, especially where those doubts are relatively easy to resolve, as was the case.
For some issues that arise I do not have the expertise or resources to test the theory, and in these cases I remain agnostic. In principle I think they are provable, but I can't do it. E.g. my doubts about the emphasis of modern medicine on fats as the main contributor to CHD (as opposed to sugars). I quite favour the low carb high fat diet, but certainly do not have the confidence to advocate it. I know I'm out on a limb.
Others are in principle not decidable by rational argument, and for me this includes beliefs about God and ethical issues which are not subject to experiment and proof. Here, I'm more in agreement with my Rev'd Brother, who believes you pays your money and takes your choice and it's a waste of time always digging away at the foundations. I would count the faithfulness of my wife as another example and wonder if the doubt-encouragers would include doubts of this type. I friend of mine was obsessed with this type of doubt and that his wife could be faking love, including even orgasms. I just found it tiresome to discuss, and a bit offended by attempts that seemed to be trying to infect me with his doubt. I feel the same with some, not all, atheists.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
There's doubt and there's doubt and there's certainty and there's certainty.
Not all doubt is equal. There's doubt as in knowing that other sensible people believe differently from oneself, and then there's doubt as crippling second-guessing of one's own beliefs and commitments. At some point, you've got to ignore any doubts you have and act.
We're all more inclined to think certainty is bad when people we disagree are certain about what they believe.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
You can go Cartesian on this, and try to doubt every bit of your mental inventory by appeal to other bits, until you run out of stuff. Then, so Descartes says, you are at least left with yourself, because you cannot doubt your own being as doubter. But this is as such rather pointless, a kind of showing off just how far you can push the envelope. Nobody, neither Descartes nor anybody else, actually works that way.
This does serious disservice to Descartes: you seem to be saying that Cogito ero sum* was the end point of his philosophical investigation, whereas it was merely the reductionist midpoint from which he built the rest of the Cartesian method.
*I think, therefore I am
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
There is no "doubt" or "questioning" without some other certainty, it just does not work that way. As soon as you say "this or that may be wrong" you are implicitly (if not explicitly) making an appeal to some other thing in your mind that is held certain.
How about if you discover two of your beliefs are mutually incompatible?
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I have been messing around with Bayes theorem most of the weekend since I stumbled upon it in rather unexpected circumstances. There is quite a good introduction to it in this Youtube video.
Actually I am working with a more complex form but I do not need to do the mathematics nor program it (phew). However my brain has been playing with it in an area related to belief and if I accept it as a rational approximation to how we adapt beliefs then something come out interesting.
- We never will get to the true value as our initial prejudices will always shape it to some extent but with enough evidence we can get close. So for something not observable e.g. the nature of God, we will never actually to say it exactly.
- Secondly it may well be change dramatically if new very different information comes in.
- Thirdly when we participate in the outcome then there is a feedback within the loop which means that I suspect it can behave unpredictably.
- There is a question about how you weight your present belief against the new evidence which is not spelt out there.
It has been an interesting weekend.
Jengie
[ 08. December 2013, 22:09: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
anteater wrote:
Others are in principle not decidable by rational argument, and for me this includes beliefs about God and ethical issues which are not subject to experiment and proof. Here, I'm more in agreement with my Rev'd Brother, who believes you pays your money and takes your choice and it's a waste of time always digging away at the foundations. I would count the faithfulness of my wife as another example and wonder if the doubt-encouragers would include doubts of this type. I friend of mine was obsessed with this type of doubt and that his wife could be faking love, including even orgasms. I just found it tiresome to discuss, and a bit offended by attempts that seemed to be trying to infect me with his doubt. I feel the same with some, not all, atheists.
That's really interesting. I met through work people who could not stop doubting, and really, it made them ill in a way, and wrecked their lives. But there are ways of controlling it or diverting it.
Your 'pays your money and takes your choice' is right - you have to bit the bullet. Ask that girl for a date, or tell that annoying guy to shut up, and so on.
I will go away now and think about the balance between doubting and not doubting, as there seems to be a balance, where life goes on, and is not paralyzed, and yet one is not impulsive all the time.
It relates to another split I encountered - some people feel and don't think; and some think and don't feel. There is a middle way.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Doubt can be crippling if it keeps you from acting. But it can be a good thing if it keeps you from acting evilly. Certainty can be crippling if you form it into a club and hit somebody on the neck with it. What I hear people saying here is that the certainty [they] don't appreciate is the certainty that is thrown in their faces or used as a club against them by obnoxious or downright evil people. Rather than be like that, some people retreat into doubt.
[ 09. December 2013, 04:36: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Certainty is the reserve of spackled-over false-fronts, armour for arguments, and idiots.
Doubt is the failings of Others. We have doubts about Them. In this context, the failing of our preferred philosophy to be sufficiently transparent or congruous when overlaid with reality. Best ignored in polite company, or when bowing to The Great Plan That Shall Not Be Questioned.
Questioning is seen as doubt's nobler and chaste little sister, reserved for higher minds and True Thinkers. It has the unspoken assumption that Everything Will Be OK, and we just haven't figured it out yet. Questioning is what we do until we pop our Doubt cherry.
We're all such fucking phony liars. The best any of us can really do is to stumble in what seems like the vague direction of possible truth, struggle to glean if things make more or less sense on our current path, and iterate by trial and error with the grim possibility that we've got it all wrong.
Maybe the truth is glorious, or maybe it's ultimately disappointing. But just think how boring life would be if we didn't have to seek out truth. Relaxing, but boring. Hmmm... maybe that's another reason to convince ourselves with illusions of certainty - for the simple restfulness of it. Lazy fuckers.
[ 09. December 2013, 05:33: Message edited by: RooK ]
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Rook, if it's in the direction of the progressive revelation of love winning, it's certain.
There is no possibility that that is wrong.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I think often about the verse in Matthew 28 after Jesus's resurrection:
"When they saw Him they worshipped Him; but some doubted."
I think that line is there to tell us that if Apostles can doubt in Christ while his shining risen face is directly in front of them, we should not be surprised to find doubt in our own walks in faith.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
