• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Are Forteans Anti-Faith?

J

Justin_Anstey

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
633
Is a defining characteristic of Forteans that they are against faith?

-Justin

PS
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=faith

I am referring to "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence" rather than "The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith."

Incidentally, the curious thing about it seems to be common that somebody will tell you their faith in their religion is strong but then go on to describe something that happened to them that gives them REASON to believe.
 
I can't speak for anyone else, but i think all religion is man made, it's the cause of too many wars and conflicts, too many people die for there so called 'religious' belief's, the bible says we have the right to choose to be evil in order to be truely free, if we didn't have this so called extra freedom, the world will be a better place. at the end of the day i see myself as a lover of the world we live in i just want to enjoy life, rather than spend my days worshiping someone who i can't be sure exhists, expecting to go onto bigger and better things when i die.
 
Well, speaking for myself I don't think I am tied to a particular faith - I guess you'd call me faithless - , but I can't say that I'm against any faith in particular. I think the thing about being "Fortean" (for me anyway) is to have a very open mind.
I am neither religious nor anti-religion, and willing to embrace arguments / evidence from either side.

Fish


:)

PS. Anyone heard of Pascal's Wager?
 
Fort recognized that the behaiviour of Scientists exposed their own
disciplines as Faiths akin to religions.

He took on the rôle of advocate for the Damned data.

He wanted to dissolve the iron shackles of absolute Truths and
encourage a more humble attitude towards natural phenomena.

In a word, he was pro-Wonder. I think Forteans are good wonderers.

Anti-Faith? Well Fort certainly loved to decorate his works with mad
pseudo-beliefs to reduce the whole idea of theories to absurdity.

He saw some sort of belief as a human necessity but thought we would
do well to keep all our beliefs provisional.

Well that's what I believe Fort meant. :)
 
Hear hear!

(Or should that be 'here here!'? Both are pretty nonsensical when you come to think about it....)
 
Does this make sense?:

The problem is with anybody, not just scientists, confusing the simplified models of reality produced by reductionist science to gain reliable knowledge to do useful things within the world, with being the absolute truth about the world as a whole. Would this be the equal but opposite false certainty to the embellishments of religious belief?

If the Damned data were to be included couldn't we get closer to absolute truth? Or will it always be too complex for any one of us to comprehend?

Is that where being 'pro-wonder' comes in? Wonder at the complexity of the whole?

But can we know with certainty that absolute truth is impossible? That would be a matter of faith, wouldn't it?

About the function of belief. I recently rewatched a recording of the third and final episode of that Ch4 series 'Testing God'. There was loads of fascinating stuff and I felt compelled to make some notes.:

Andy Clark, philosopher and cognitive scientist at the University of Sussex, said that rather than being a primitive thing, belief without total knowledge is what makes us smart. Without it nothing would get done, we need to believe before we can act. It's the only way of negotiating the complexities and uncertainties of life and belief in god may be part of that to account for the gaps in our knowledge.

"I believe this, it seems useful, that's good enough"

I think that is a not unreasonable thing to believe or accept, for the moment anyway. (I really should read more into this.)

So, where does that leave scientists theories? They need some reason to act don't they?
I suppose the problem is with confusing hypotheses with conclusions.

Forteans would seem to be anti-dogma, then.

-Justin.
 
Scientists are pro-wonder as well. If a person didn't find the cosmos to be such a wonderful place I doubt he would become a scientist.
 
As I've aways understood it religious faith fixes a meaning or a causation to certain events that holds true for all time, a point beyond which you cannot go in thought, because you always have the ultimate answer of 'because of God'.

I wouldn't say that forteans are necessarily anti-faith, they just hold back on a final verdict pending further data.
 
Forteanism and Faith

I don't suppose that Fort was ever anti-anything. How can you hold a stance against anything that is transient. Certain faiths hold certain principles that you can agree with, but you cannot have faith in every belief that a religion has. You have to pick and choose. You may say that this denegerates from the point of a religion, but if you sample from the palattes of different religions, then you get a much greater variety of colour.

Religion, like science, is merely an extension of human needs, and, as such, a reflection of the inherent design of the universe.

The Laughing Buddha...Zen humour...the cosmic joker.

I would go for Buddhism. I can't abide kneeling. Then again, I just couldn't seriously worship a god who rains down frogs as often as he does brimstone. I'd just end up sniggering.

Faith? Whatever you're into.
 
i'm anything i feel at the moment...

a little bit of buddha...a little bit of god... a little bit of lucifer...a little bit of nothing...

i think Forteans can believe or not believe...but i think we can all agree that religion and it's effects are fortean themselves
 
MrFish said:
...

PS. Anyone heard of Pascal's Wager?
Click to expand...

Essentially boils down to the metaphor of hedging your bet so that you either win big or lose nothing. Applied directly to religion it means that you may as well worship an "ultimate power/deity" because if there is one then you have assured yourself a place of eternal bliss in the afterlife, and if there isn't an afterlife and the aetheists are right, then when you die, it won't make any difference so you haven't lost anything.

Clever, but I don't think it takes into account abstinence (denying yourself experiences in what little life you have for an afterlife that may not exist), multiple/conflicting religions (will you be condemned for choosing the wrong religion) and the fact that a deity may not be too chuffed with you paying him lipservice just for an easy ride. :blah:
 
I'm not anti Faith I just didn't like that sitcom he did.....


Anyway, gods create all men and all men create gods.
Those who beleive in such things are no more advanced now than when the cavemen were worshiping volcanoes.
But if they're happy let them get on with it.
The only thing about faith I am against is Jehovah witnesses...
 
Worshipping volcanoes

What is worship but appealing to higher powers?

A volcano poses more threat than God does.

Ergo: worship volcanoes first.
 
Re: Worshipping volcanoes

Iankidd said:
What is worship but appealing to higher powers?

A volcano poses more threat than God does.

Ergo: worship volcanoes first.
Click to expand...

True. And it would probably have the same result anyway.
 
Worshipping Forecast

[It would probably have the same result anyway]

i.e. Nowt
 
Re: Does this make sense?:

Justin Anstey said:
Is that where being 'pro-wonder' comes in? Wonder at the complexity of the whole?

But can we know with certainty that absolute truth is impossible? That would be a matter of faith, wouldn't it?

Andy Clark, philosopher and cognitive scientist at the University of Sussex, said that rather than being a primitive thing, belief without total knowledge is what makes us smart. Without it nothing would get done, we need to believe before we can act. It's the only way of negotiating the complexities and uncertainties of life and belief in god may be part of that to account for the gaps in our knowledge.

Forteans would seem to be anti-dogma, then.

-Justin.
Click to expand...

I think many people feel that faith is dogma, an unreasoned belief in a certain outcome. I feel that faith is the willingness to move forward when an outcome is uncertain. It is the will of the human mind to step beyond its boundaries and chart new territory. If some need the image of a god guiding them through that process, then for them it is a necessary step. If you take god as meaning that which is indivisible, the root from which all things come, then it can be reasonable to think that keeping the image of the source of all things in mind will help you to move past your basic patterns and create a new variance, new pathways, new knowledge.
 
I wonder what Father Fanthorpe would have to say on this subject?
Maybe someone should drop him a line.
 
I definately am a believer in a god and ask that god for help but the available religions are all lost dogmatic beaurocracies(unsure of spelling) and none interest me as a religion I would like to join.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top