First principles on faith

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

The existence or non-existence of (a) God cannot be proven or disproven. Does this however mean that the explicit non-belief that such a God exists is the only possible alternatief to a belief in that God? Think not. There is the possibility of shrugging your shoulders and say "Hu? No idea..." In that case there is no action that expresses a belief nor the explicit rejection of its content. Hence, it would not make sense to claim that such non- action is also a statement of "faith".

If the above is sound, the next question is if it is possible to also passively shrug your shoulders and say "Hu? I don't know.." (nor even really care....) on something like the acclaimed first principle of faith/trust/belief or any other first principle stand-in. Is it?
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

Parodite wrote:The existence or non-existence of (a) God cannot be proven or disproven. Does this however mean that the explicit non-belief that such a God exists is the only possible alternatief to a belief in that God? Think not. There is the possibility of shrugging your shoulders and say "Hu? No idea..." In that case there is no action that expresses a belief nor the explicit rejection of its content. Hence, it would not make sense to claim that such non- action is also a statement of "faith".

If the above is sound, the next question is if it is possible to also passively shrug your shoulders and say "Hu? I don't know.." (nor even really care....) on something like the acclaimed first principle of faith/trust/belief or any other first principle stand-in. Is it?
A quick reply: No, I don't think it possible to cop the "God" question because where first things such as where did I come from, why am I here, etc. are concerned, there are only two possibilities—God or no God—and "Huh?" is simply to choose "no God" without the cojones to come right out and say so.

We can go from there . .
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
User avatar
YMix
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:53 am
Location: Department of Congruity - Report any outliers here

Re: First principles on faith

Post by YMix »

Marcus wrote:A quick reply: No, I don't think it possible to cop the "God" question because where first things such as where did I come from, why am I here, etc. are concerned, there are only two possibilities—God or no God—and "Huh?" is simply to choose "no God" without the cojones to come right out and say so.
Why do you deny the existence of a third option? I came from my parents and I have no particular reason to be here. That's as far as I go in such matters and there are more interesting things to do than to ponder your "first things".
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA
The Kushner sh*t is greasy - Stevie B.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Ibrahim »

YMix wrote:
Marcus wrote:A quick reply: No, I don't think it possible to cop the "God" question because where first things such as where did I come from, why am I here, etc. are concerned, there are only two possibilities—God or no God—and "Huh?" is simply to choose "no God" without the cojones to come right out and say so.
Why do you deny the existence of a third option? I came from my parents and I have no particular reason to be here. That's as far as I go in such matters and there are more interesting things to do than to ponder your "first things".

This is why Marcus is clearly wrong on this subject. He tries to impose a false dichotomy, but in fact "I don't know" is a valid third option. In fact it's the honest answer to most questions, as per Hume.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

Marcus wrote:
Parodite wrote:The existence or non-existence of (a) God cannot be proven or disproven. Does this however mean that the explicit non-belief that such a God exists is the only possible alternatief to a belief in that God? Think not. There is the possibility of shrugging your shoulders and say "Hu? No idea..." In that case there is no action that expresses a belief nor the explicit rejection of its content. Hence, it would not make sense to claim that such non- action is also a statement of "faith".

If the above is sound, the next question is if it is possible to also passively shrug your shoulders and say "Hu? I don't know.." (nor even really care....) on something like the acclaimed first principle of faith/trust/belief or any other first principle stand-in. Is it?
A quick reply: No, I don't think it possible to cop the "God" question because where first things such as where did I come from, why am I here, etc. are concerned, there are only two possibilities—God or no God—and "Huh?" is simply to choose "no God" without the cojones to come right out and say so.

We can go from there . .
I think the "where did I come from, why am I here, etc." are good questions. I remember the "why am I here" question that kind of struck me when I was 5 years old, just walking on the pavement on my way to school. Gave kind of an eerie feeling too. Or the "why am I the conscious self that is me, and not the conscious 'I' from somebody else" that more kids at one point ask themselves.

Those types of questions that tend to remain unanswered or appear unanswerable are maybe "wrong" at some level? Perhaps they can be understood similar to something like "why are things the way they are?", i.e. the answer is in the question already because it is self-referential.

What happens when linear-causal thought finds itself in a dead end street? Well, thought is simply over and returns to questions and issues for which it seems better equipped, such as how to build a bridge or boil an egg.

When thought moved away from such unanswerable "1st order" questions, what happens? Do we slide into a state of 1st-order faith? Do we need some answer that at least provisionally fills the gap? I can't think of any reason why that should happen, nor is there much evidence that human beings always resort to faith-like statements when answers are not available.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
YMix
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:53 am
Location: Department of Congruity - Report any outliers here

Re: First principles on faith

Post by YMix »

I think the "where did I come from, why am I here, etc." are good questions. I remember the "why am I here" question that kind of struck me when I was 5 years old, just walking on the pavement on my way to school. Gave kind of an eerie feeling too. Or the "why am I the conscious self that is me, and not the conscious 'I' from somebody else" that more kids at one point ask themselves.
I don't remember asking myself such questions in my childhood. :)
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA
The Kushner sh*t is greasy - Stevie B.
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

Parodite wrote:. . When thought moved away from such unanswerable "1st order" questions, what happens? Do we slide into a state of 1st-order faith? Do we need some answer that at least provisionally fills the gap? I can't think of any reason why that should happen, nor is there much evidence that human beings always resort to faith-like statements when answers are not available.
Yes, we do indeed need the answers to such 1st Order questions . . just the nature of the beast so to speak (though a Calvinist would say it's our response to an inborn Sensus Divinitatus).

And, yes, we always and inescapably must resort to faith/belief, because at the 1st Order of things, that's our only option. We assume some sort of 1st order and reason from there.

Can't, for the life of me, figure out why that should be a problem . . :?
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Ibrahim »

Marcus wrote:
And, yes, we always and inescapably must resort to faith/belief, because at the 1st Order of things, that's our only option. We assume some sort of 1st order and reason from there.

That is false. There is absolutely nothing forcing somebody to make this decision, and other options do exist. Numerous philosophers have provided alternatives from the Cartesian method to existentialism.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

Marcus wrote:
Parodite wrote:. . When thought moved away from such unanswerable "1st order" questions, what happens? Do we slide into a state of 1st-order faith? Do we need some answer that at least provisionally fills the gap? I can't think of any reason why that should happen, nor is there much evidence that human beings always resort to faith-like statements when answers are not available.
Yes, we do indeed need the answers to such 1st Order questions . . just the nature of the beast so to speak (though a Calvinist would say it's our response to an inborn Sensus Divinitatus).

And, yes, we always and inescapably must resort to faith/belief, because at the 1st Order of things, that's our only option. We assume some sort of 1st order and reason from there.
Well, to me 1st order of things is more like the fact of being. To ask questions.. of type a) b) c)...with answers available or none.. is secundary.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

YMix wrote:
I think the "where did I come from, why am I here, etc." are good questions. I remember the "why am I here" question that kind of struck me when I was 5 years old, just walking on the pavement on my way to school. Gave kind of an eerie feeling too. Or the "why am I the conscious self that is me, and not the conscious 'I' from somebody else" that more kids at one point ask themselves.
I don't remember asking myself such questions in my childhood. :)
Lucky bird ? ;) (Could be another interesting question... (oh no..!) ..why do some children and adults ask themselves certain questions.. and others never do...? :o )

Marcus.. you hear that?? There are people who never bothered themselves with certain questions... :shock:
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

Parodite wrote:Marcus.. you hear that?? There are people who never bothered themselves with certain questions... :shock:
Yeah, I heard it and am surprised as well. Don't know that I started pondering such stuff at five years old but certainly by ten. But then my mother had us in Sunday School long before that. Maybe such questions come naturally to those raised with the transcendent?

Dunno . . though I doubt our dogs are bothered with such stuff . . . ;)

And while we're at it, Rhap, why are some people so hung up on or afraid of the word "faith"? It's not a particularly religious word . . like, you know, "I have faith in my investments" or "I have faith that if I plant a garden I'll reap a harvest." What's up with that? Now that's what shocks me . . :shock:
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
Posts: 2150
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Miss_Faucie_Fishtits »

You grasp as a little monglet that life can turn up shitty and you want do-overs. Simple as that.......'>.......
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Ibrahim »

Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote:You grasp as a little monglet that life can turn up shitty and you want do-overs. Simple as that.......'>.......
Then wouldn't everyone be a Buddhist?
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Say what?

Post by Marcus »

Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote:You grasp as a little monglet that life can turn up shitty and you want do-overs. Simple as that.......'>.......
Sorry, Liz, but you're as enigmatic as ever . . put it in plain English for me . . old age, y'know . . :(

No, no . . the questions begin long, long before one finds out that life can suck bad enough to want another go-'round.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
Posts: 2150
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Miss_Faucie_Fishtits »

No, that's the first bit for me and everything builds out from that. We may be working from entirely different maps, but that's how it works for me......
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote:No, that's the first bit for me and everything builds out from that. We may be working from entirely different maps, but that's how it works for me......
Whatever flies your kite, Liz. That said, I think everyone's map is pretty much the same . . kind of a "given" if you will. What matters is where we start 'cause that defines where we expect (or hope) to end up.

Cheer up . . .
All the bluster and conceit
All the hare-brained indiscreet
Obfuscations and obsessions,
All the ludicrous confessions,
Put them by now, put them by,
Clean them out before you die.

Even though you can’t undo
All the mess that makes up you,
Find a modicum of quiet;
Quash the long uncivil riot
That goes on inside your heart;
Clear the drunks out, make a start.

—Dick Davis
(printed in First Things magazine some years back)
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
User avatar
YMix
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:53 am
Location: Department of Congruity - Report any outliers here

Re: First principles on faith

Post by YMix »

Marcus wrote:
Parodite wrote:Marcus.. you hear that?? There are people who never bothered themselves with certain questions... :shock:
Yeah, I heard it and am surprised as well. Don't know that I started pondering such stuff at five years old but certainly by ten. But then my mother had us in Sunday School long before that. Maybe such questions come naturally to those raised with the transcendent?
The first time I seriously faced the "mysteries of life" was around the age of 14, when I read Twain's "Mysterious Stranger", which made quite an impression on me. But even then the question was "why do people do what they do?", not "why am I here?".
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA
The Kushner sh*t is greasy - Stevie B.
Dioscuri
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:54 am

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Dioscuri »

If one endeavors to speak in terms that are irrefutable and to make no statement that is not rooted in certainty, the following is the only "first principle" that can be maintained:


There exist in this universe 3 elementary cognitions.

Of these, 2 are dual forms, such that one could just as well state that there are 5 elementary cognitions, it makes no difference (0=2, after all).

The first elementary cognition is that of the Interior and the Exterior.

The second elementary cognition is that of Identical and the Different.

The third elementary cognition is the Name.


The singular form of the Name mediates between between the dual forms, such that:

{Interior/Exterior} <> Name <> {Identity/Difference}


These are the universal axioms of all that is cognizable. All else, "Human," "God," "Space," "Time," "Matter," "Energy," "Faith," etc., are Names for complexes of form. They are all reducible to sets consisting of nothing but the elementary cognitions.
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

. . all Greek to me . . . :?
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by noddy »

i suspect he was getting atthe core primitives which is a materialist understanding of human heads and their thinking.

aka his first principles are that we like to categorise things and give them properties and names.

their are things which humans give names to which in themselves may or may not exist as discrete entities.. they could be complex side effects of many other smaller aspects.. like "society" which is the complex side effect of lots of individuals interacting.

is god an entity or is it a concept...your stance on this issue tends to leave you theist or atheist...im in the latter, i consider god a metaphorical concept for reality (physical,emotional ...the whole shebang)
ultracrepidarian
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

Dunno . . pretty sparse lacking further perspective from whatever background material he's drawing on . . Aristotelian perhaps . . maybe he'll come back and fill us in . .
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

Dioscuri wrote:The singular form of the Name mediates between between the dual forms, such that:

{Interior/Exterior} <> Name <> {Identity/Difference}
Think this is a pretty good model of cognition. We identify similar differences and different similarities (i.e. differences) "in here" within the confines of our bodies and "out there" in the world around us.

<>Name<> is the "subtitler" that not only labels sense perceptions such as objects, feeling, thoughts... but can also on its own construct imaginary worlds of {interior/exterior <>name<>differences}.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
Posts: 2150
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Miss_Faucie_Fishtits »

I take that "{Interior/Exterior}" is contextually related to "{Self/Other}", which is the duality I more commonly encounter.....
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Parodite »

Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote:I take that "{Interior/Exterior}" is contextually related to "{Self/Other}", which is the duality I more commonly encounter.....
And to end up under each others skin? The whole thing messes up.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: First principles on faith

Post by Marcus »

So far, the guy's post has elicited an "I suspect," a "Dunno," an " think," and an "I take it."

Clear as mud . . . :?
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Post Reply