Why can't there be faith?

[merid]

Now, I am new so I apologise if this has already been covered. If so just let it fall into oblivion.

Now I was brought up as a Catholic by my parents and as soon as I was old enough to make up my own mind I became atheist, obviously because of the whole lack of faith prevalent in INTJ's. However I do believe that there is a logical explanatation to life that has for lack of a better word 'Godly' overtones.

I am no scientist and I base my conclusions on secondary school physics, but isn't energy infinite and indestructible? You take a ball and hold it in the air, it is potential energy. Then drop it and it is kinetic energy. There is the same amount of energy now as there was a million years ago. There are not the same amount of humans though, and if each and every one of us contains energy, where does it come from?

So the crux of what I am saying, as I realise it might not be clear, is that surely it is logical to believe in energy as some sort of religion? When we die our energy (I don't like the word soul) goes back to the larger mass of potential energy. So does believing this imply faith?

Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?

[Victoria Silver]

Well, let's clear one thing up first of all. The fact that there are more people around now than in the past does not mean that the universe has more energy in it. It just means that it's been shifted around in a different way. (I'm putting this badly, I know, but I hope you can follow me.)

I'm not sure why energy should be considered a religion, or why the fact that the energy in my body will be distributed differently after I am dead has anything to do with religion.

As to the much larger question about a logical belief in a god, well, many logical people believe and many logical people do not. There will never be any final answer to this.

[Moriarty]

I've never considered humans within the confines of energy conservation. That's a very interesting thought that bears consideration.

As for the question of having "logical faith", I would have to say no. The two words are in opposition. That does not preclude the appreciation and awe one might hold when considering how truly beautiful, complex and mysterious the cosmos is, and many a scientist has referred to the cosmos or the Earth in a deistic fashion in order to express their wonderment. :)

[Antares]

Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?

Well, if we place trust in Einstein's theory of Relativity, it predicts that all laws would break down at infinity (indeed, you can't do math with infinity), and therefore there might not be any laws before the universe. Which implies? It is possible that everything we know; every last newton of energy; every last gram of matter, simply 'popped' into existence, and when the 'creation' or 'big bang' happened, laws came into existence. Before the universe, it can be safely hypothesized that it was all a big blob of infinity. There isn't a need of deity if we accept the possibility that the law you mentioned did not exist before the beginning of the universe. Without laws, it would be chaos and unpredictability; unlike anything we'd ever encounter and certainly can be inconceivable to our logic (well, to mine anyway. I still fail to perceive how something can just exist; just like that).

When we die our energy (I don't like the word soul) goes back to the larger mass of potential energy. So does believing this imply faith?

I don't 'believe' this and don't see how that's 'religious' in any way. I know this to be true. We all came from the cosmos and are star stuff. We're all carbon beings, really. The sunlight (pure energy) gets absorbed by plants to form glucose and oxygen. We, in turn, breathe it in to perform cellular respiration which creates energy for the human body. Some of the energy created will cause mitosis and meiosis, and through sex we conceive the next generation. After we die, we are decomposed by fungi and bacteria, which provide food for the next line in the bottom of the food chain, working up, producing CO2 for the plants etc. Say, aren't we all the children of the cosmos?

[merid]

I don't 'believe' this and don't see how that's 'religious' in any way. I know this to be true. We all came from the cosmos and are star stuff. We're all carbon beings, really. The sunlight (pure energy) gets absorbed by plants to form glucose and oxygen. We, in turn, breathe it in to perform cellular respiration which creates energy for the human body. Some of the energy created will cause mitosis and meiosis, and through sex we conceive the next generation. After we die, we are decomposed by fungi and bacteria, which provide food for the next line in the bottom of the food chain, working up, producing CO2 for the plants etc. Say, aren't we all the children of the cosmos?

Religious was the wrong word to use. But have you not pointed out that Sunlight is pure energy and is passed to plants, you haven't mentioned any other energy transfers. We are all carbon based beings sure but we all contain energy and use energy, the fact is that energy is not then destroyed but transformed. When we die the bacteria come to decompose our bodies, but chemical reactions are occuring to do this, therefore utilising energy.

With the mention of hypotheses, having the formula to think we know, doesn't mean we do actually know and therefore requires a certain amount of faith to adopt, does it not?

[Antares]

Religious was the wrong word to use. But have you not pointed out that Sunlight is pure energy and is passed to plants, you haven't mentioned any other energy transfers. We are all carbon based beings sure but we all contain energy and use energy, the fact is that energy is not then destroyed but transformed. When we die the bacteria come to decompose our bodies, but chemical reactions are occuring to do this, therefore utilising energy.

I know. What I used was just an anecdote, an example of how we're a part of the cosmos. I suppose I didn't go into the details of energy transfer.

[vaguely dissatisfied]

I think faith is necessary for human mental health. Faith in yourself, faith in some others, faith in the experts, etc. If I didn't have faith in my doctor, then I wouldn't take the medicine she prescribes. If I don't have faith in my partner's ability to drive, then I'm not going to get in a vehicle with him. If I don't have faith in my ability to learn, then I won't persue the career paths I have wanted to persue.

People who have faith in god have simply taken this natural, healthy human trait one step further. But, have they gone too far? The question is, "Where do we stop having faith and begin to doubt?" What is a healthy cut off for this faith? Having no faith in anything can imobilize us, but too much faith can leave us at risk.

[Santana28]

Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?

yes.

i was atheist growing up.

since then, i have seen far too many "coincidences" when it comes to religion and God.

i've written a few things on the subject... let me see if i can dig them up. when its not 8am. ugh.

[mxdntz]

Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?

Check out the Hindu belief of Brahman, it seems very logical to me from a physics standpoint.
In my world religions class I experienced a :idea: moment when we studied this.Check out this article,

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I just took pieces of Hinduism, Buddhism and others to form my faith. These eastern religions are very tolerant and fascinating, besides the caste system of course. ;D

[sriv]

It seems like you are trying to vaguely relate energy to the concept of soul. You do not have to go to desperate measures to try and convince yourself of something. Leave that for the madmen.

I myself find the eastern religions the most flexible and thought-provoking. They do not expect you to conform and follow a rigid belief system and they allow a large area of doubt.

[rwyatt365]

Faith (in my estimation) is a state of mind, and not a function of matter/energy. Matter and energy are involved only insofar as the brain (matter) utilizes electro-chemical processes (energy) in the development of the thoughts used to evoke the concept of faith. So, one would have to leave matter/energy out of the existence of faith (faith is a concept).

As to whether faith (as a concept) is logical or rational. I would defer to the KJV definition of faith (don't ask me to quote the chapter & verse) which is; "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the essence of things unseen." If one accepts that definition then - by definition - there is no de-facto rational basis for faith, it can be based on non-rational (notice, I didn't say irrational) things. "Non-rational" in that hope and "things unseen" cannot be rationalized; hope is a wish, a desire and "things unseen" are that which has no observable reality.

Does this mean that faith is ALWAYS non-rational? No, not necessarily. I can have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow. That faith can have an entirely rational basis - that the earth orbits the sun according to Newton's Laws therefore it will "rise" at the appointed time. Or, it can have an entirely non-rational basis - that God made the sun to rise, and so it must. Either of those can be upset by a supernova (for the rational), or God's whimsy (for the non-rational).

That's the long way around my answer; yes, there can be faith, and yes, it it possible for faith to be rational. But then again... ;)

[TheLastMohican]

Now, I am new so I apologise if this has already been covered. If so just let it fall into oblivion.

Now I was brought up as a Catholic by my parents and as soon as I was old enough to make up my own mind I became atheist, obviously because of the whole lack of faith prevalent in INTJ's. However I do believe that there is a logical explanatation to life that has for lack of a better word 'Godly' overtones.

I am no scientist and I base my conclusions on secondary school physics, but isn't energy infinite and indestructible? You take a ball and hold it in the air, it is potential energy. Then drop it and it is kinetic energy. There is the same amount of energy now as there was a million years ago. There are not the same amount of humans though, and if each and every one of us contains energy, where does it come from?

So the crux of what I am saying, as I realise it might not be clear, is that surely it is logical to believe in energy as some sort of religion? When we die our energy (I don't like the word soul) goes back to the larger mass of potential energy. So does believing this imply faith?

Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?

I do not know if you can have a purely logical belief merely in the existence of a god. I think you can have one in the God. The difference? The latter allows far more empirical evidence to be figured in. The former relies mainly on philosophical reasoning. While I believe my philosophical reasoning is relatively sound, I do not believe that it is infallible, so certainty based just on that is not something I can attain.

[zibber]

Religious was the wrong word to use. But have you not pointed out that Sunlight is pure energy and is passed to plants, you haven't mentioned any other energy transfers. We are all carbon based beings sure but we all contain energy and use energy, the fact is that energy is not then destroyed but transformed. When we die the bacteria come to decompose our bodies, but chemical reactions are occuring to do this, therefore utilising energy.


If you want to go that route, why not go a bit broader and see your death as the release of elementary particles back into the stream?

Actually, now that I say that, I realise that any living person is already fully integrated in that stream. It's not like your body is some closed system of particles (and indeed energy) that is only opened upon death.

As for the general feel of this thread, it reminds me of Spinoza. He was, as far as I know, the first (still somewhat religious) philosopher who wanted to define "love of God" as "love of 'Nature'", as in some deep appreciation for the abstract concept. (Living "for God" would be: living up to human nature.) I have a statue of Shiva as Nataraja sitting next to me, it's basically the same thing. I had my ultra rational, antitheistic period, but now I get some manner of fulfilment and, oddly, warmth, out of the consideration of the whole concept of creation and destruction, beginning and ending, the insane size, depth and resulting unintelligibility of physical reality. (The sublime, if you will.)

[merid]

Check out the Hindu belief of Brahman, it seems very logical to me from a physics standpoint.
In my world religions class I experienced a :idea: moment when we studied this.Check out this article,

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I just took pieces of Hinduism, Buddhism and others to form my faith. These eastern religions are very tolerant and fascinating, besides the caste system of course. ;D

That article is astounding. I have never really searched to see if what I believed had been mentioned before. I don't know why but the Eastern belief systems do resonate more with me.

Jarno, I already do believe that. Not to sound too crazy, this is what I believe.

1) At the point of existence there was a finite amount of energy, obviously a huge amount. But I believe that there was something that caused the sudden existence, I won't say God as that implies a force that interacts and takes note.

2) We come into existence to learn, to experience. When we die, everything that we have been leaves our bodies with our energy and rejoins the mass. However, I believe that all those that have come before are creating a library if you will of experience, to which we contribute to.

3) I believe in reincarnation. Once we have rejoined the stream, the energy that was us is then re-used. Beginning the cycle again.

4)Now, when and if humans do learn more about the universe until we get to a point where everything is open to us. i.e. we can create suns etc. I think that humans will stop reproducing, meaning that the death library will be complete.

5) This is where I go crazy. I think that if we have mastered effects and energy to such an extent, the death library will be the complete collection of human history and experience. As we like to experiment, to learn more, I think we would create a new universe.

Ok, I realise there are a few flaws in what I have said, and I have thought about it all.

1)Aliens. If there are aliens, would they be in the same library. My answer is no. When I think of humans, I realise that we are all different. We share the same energy as we would with aliens, but we are different. I make the leap to assume that aliens, if there are any, would be radically different in wavelength to share the same energistic realm.

2) If humans reached a point and then made a new universe, what does that mean? Does that mean that aliens created this universe? Yes and no. I believe that there are multiple universes, but not mutliple branches of events. (fate and pre-destiny is another topic) I think the universe was created as an experiment. So if humans reach a point that we can do the same, I think we will create another universe, that sits alongside all the other universes that have been created.

3) Does this mean that there is a God? Yes, the consciousness of the creation energy would mean that there is a force. However why would they care what we do or how we do it? If as I believe, the universe is one big experiment, then the creation energy is just there.

4) Why just humans and not plants and animals. This again is related to the different wavelength or frequency.


I may have ripped off other ideas, in fact the article has pointed out that I have. But to me it makes sense.

[futureperfect5]

The fundamental problem with faith is that it allows a measure of doubt. We want certainty. We want to know.

Quantum physics allows us to know.

"So does believing this imply faith? Is it possible to have a logical belief in for lack of a better word, God?"

[stasis]

The conversation about visualizing physical theory has been moved here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[zibber]

merid, I think you're taking things to an unnecessarily convoluted level.. Occam is doing cartwheels in his grave.

Why can't people take knowledge and consciousness to be things physically bound to an individual's body? I really don't get this mumbo jumbo about knowledge/experience "leaving the body" when we die. What implies that?

[merid]

To me it is not convoluted, but simple. My rationale for believing in the being leaving the body upon death is that we don't know everything there is to know about energy. Take a person from the 16th Century and they will think we are heretics and magicians. I do realise that the argument for not knowing is true, that is why it is faith ;)

[Antares]

merid, I think you're taking things to an unnecessarily convoluted level.. Occam is doing cartwheels in his grave.

Why can't people take knowledge and consciousness to be things physically bound to an individual's body? I really don't get this mumbo jumbo about knowledge/experience "leaving the body" when we die. What implies that?

I think humans invented this out of a desire to conquer death; or the fear of death. It's easier to be fearless in the face of death if you know something comes after... For example, heaven.

Take a person from the 16th Century and they will think we are heretics and magicians.

Well, some of us would be, not all of us though. Me, for one, am a heretic.

[merid]

I think humans invented this out of a desire to conquer death; or the fear of death. It's easier to be fearless in the face of death if you know something comes after... For example, heaven.

For religions I would agree with you. But thinking that energy with experience leaves your body upon death does not imply any sort of afterlife. You as a person will be dead, there will be nothing more for you. Does potential energy experience?