Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 324: Line 324:     
Despite Phil's protestations, faith is defined by believing something ''without'' evidence.  Faith is a feeling, often a decision, to believe in something grander than nature/science. When one is overwhelmed with religious feeling or epiphany, this is a subjective phenomenon.  As most of us know, applying science to God rarely leaves either smelling right.  Dawkins denies the value of the concept of ''nonoverlapping magisteria'', but it really is a useful concept, and probably more so for Theists than Atheists.  I don't want someone coming after my faith with an electron microscope.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 14:17, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
 
Despite Phil's protestations, faith is defined by believing something ''without'' evidence.  Faith is a feeling, often a decision, to believe in something grander than nature/science. When one is overwhelmed with religious feeling or epiphany, this is a subjective phenomenon.  As most of us know, applying science to God rarely leaves either smelling right.  Dawkins denies the value of the concept of ''nonoverlapping magisteria'', but it really is a useful concept, and probably more so for Theists than Atheists.  I don't want someone coming after my faith with an electron microscope.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 14:17, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:PalMD is correct on all counts.  Faith is a very personal thing, a subjective experience based as much on a longing for purpose as any active decision to believe,  It is also much like a drug -- epiphantic moments trigger the same release of chemicals as most euphoria-causing drugs.  There is a close affinity between the faithful and people who are substance-dependant: both need to rely on internalised experience based on an external catalyst to reach some form of temporary fulfillment or psychological rapture/ecstacy. [[User:NousEpirrhytos|NousEpirrhytos]] 14:29, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Navigation menu