path to truth

Originally posted by @black-beetle
Edit: "You can see the world around you yet that doesn’t mean you understand it or fathom all there is about it."

Yes. This ain't mean whatever we do not understand we should try to explain it by means of blind beliefs. We can simply keep in mind we do not know yet, and keep up trying to get to know in the future, if possible. There is nothing wron ...[text shortened]... ctly mind-depended and really true to the respectful sentient beings whose minds perceive them😵

Blind beliefs? I cannot think of very many of those. Within my beliefs about God there are
as many blind spots as someone who denies Him. I have reasons for my beliefs that I
believe show me God is real. Some of them are the universe itself, I believe only nothing
comes from nothing, and God created the universe. This is faith, just as it is faith to
suggest since it cannot be proven God isn't required. No one knows how the universe got
here, but we take a stand one way or another, some believe God did it, others suggest
they know God wasn't required, that is a statement of faith since they truly don't know
either.

I don't own truth, truth will true if I'm here or not thinking about it. I own my opinion, I have
a perspective, but truth we are all walking around inside of it with blinders on, seeing as
through a glass darkly.

Originally posted by @apathist
Is faith a reliable path towards truth.

If truth is relative and not absolute, it's not reliable anyway.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If truth is relative and not absolute, it's not reliable anyway.

In my training in educational testing, a 'path' is reliable to the degree that the same path gets you to the same result. Validity is the measure of whether it gets you to where it purports to get you, compared to some ultimate gold standard. In this case we would be comparing faith to what? Isn't faith the gold standard, since what it ultimately gets you is not to be obtained by any other means?

Originally posted by @js357
In my training in educational testing, a 'path' is reliable to the degree that the same path gets you to the same result. Validity is the measure of whether it gets you to where it purports to get you, compared to some ultimate gold standard. In this case we would be comparing faith to what? Isn't faith the gold standard, since what it ultimately gets you is not to be obtained by any other means?

Faith is the horse that pulls our carts, what our carts are could be quite different.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Blind beliefs? I cannot think of very many of those. Within my beliefs about God there are
as many blind spots as someone who denies Him. I have reasons for my beliefs that I
believe show me God is real. Some of them are the universe itself, I believe only nothing
comes from nothing, and God created the universe. This is faith, just as it is faith to
s ...[text shortened]... ruth we are all walking around inside of it with blinders on, seeing as
through a glass darkly.

Religious beliefs are all blind. All the religious beliefs about G-d are by definition blind, otherwise it is untenable to assert that G-d is transcedental.
Likewise, all the kinds of beliefs as regards G-d are blind too, because they cannot be falsified.

Furthermore, to claim that "the universe is proof itself" is not tenable, because whatever you assert is always a product of your purely subjective mental activity. Without your purely subjective perception, analysis and evaluation the universe is not existent to you. All you know about whatever, it is grounded strictly on your purely subjective mental activity.
Faith is not a viable path to truth because it cannot envelop knowledge; once faith is enveloped by knowledge, faith is not required; once the everchanging knowledge is constantly updated, faith is not required; when we come up with viable scientific theories of reality, faith is not required. What is required, is to know when you know and to know when you do not know. And in this case too, faith is not required.

Next: You own the truth that you acknowledge as true, however! When I am experiencing pain, I Am the sole Truth of my pain, because my pain is existent solely in the context of my purely subjective experience (and the same is properly said as regards our purely subjective sensemaking and awarenes apparatus).
The point is that I can never be sure I do evaluate the severity of my pain "objectively". For it is my knowledge that objectivity is non-existent.
😵

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Faith is the horse that pulls our carts, what our carts are could be quite different.

You mean the Horse that pulls Your cart, Kellyjay😵

Originally posted by @kellyjay
... I believe only nothing comes from nothing, and God created the universe....

God is a magical flower in south america. It cannot be found, but it was there before it created the universe. It's still there, and its existence explains everything. You kids, with your shivas and yahwehs and thors. God isn't above nor below, it is here holding the sky to the ground!

Originally posted by @black-beetle
You mean the Horse that pulls Your cart, Kellyjay😵

No, I said what I wanted to say.

Originally posted by @apathist
God is a magical flower in south america. It cannot be found, but it was there before it created the universe. It's still there, and its existence explains everything. You kids, with your shivas and yahwehs and thors. God isn't above nor below, it is here holding the sky to the ground!

Because you don't see doesn't mean others don't. You have no issues telling others how
wrong they are, which is suggesting your right. Pardon me if I ignore your wisdom on this
topic.

Originally posted by @black-beetle
Religious beliefs are all blind. All the religious beliefs about G-d are by definition blind, otherwise it is untenable to assert that G-d is transcedental.
Likewise, all the kinds of beliefs as regards G-d are blind too, because they cannot be falsified.

Furthermore, to claim that "the universe is proof itself" is not tenable, because whatever you ...[text shortened]... severity of my pain "objectively". For it is my knowledge that objectivity is non-existent.
😵

All religions are blind, quite a statement. So you see, you'll have no excuse at the end.
Faith doesn't give you truth, truth is something you find, and faith is how you deal with it in
the world as you walk in it. You believe you are the finial judge of truth, quite position to
have. Small wonder you cannot see what you don't want to.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Because you don't see doesn't mean others don't. You have no issues telling others how
wrong they are, which is suggesting your right. Pardon me if I ignore your wisdom on this
topic.

You are confused about my motives. I'm not saying I must be right. I'm saying show me my mistakes.

One of my buttons, if you know what I mean, is hypocrisy, the old double standard. Your objections to my objections do not clarify a solid foundation for your view - they merely show you reject other views by using standards your own view does not rise to.

You are defensive, which goes with the territory you are defending. Except when your camp says who gets hell of eternal torment, and which sexes and races you are allowed to oppress, and which churches get absurdly rich by soaking off of poor people, and etc etc.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
All religions are blind, quite a statement.

He said they are not based on facts, evidence, reason, logic.

The rest of your post was embarrassing projection. omg

Originally posted by @apathist
He said they are not based on facts, evidence, reason, logic.

The rest of your post was embarrassing projection. omg

When given reason and facts, what happened?

Originally posted by @apathist
You are confused about my motives. I'm not saying I must be right. I'm saying show me my mistakes.

One of my buttons, if you know what I mean, is hypocrisy, the old double standard. Your objections to my objections do not clarify a solid foundation for your view - they merely show you reject other views by using standards your own view does not rise to. ...[text shortened]... wed to oppress, and which churches get absurdly rich by soaking off of poor people, and etc etc.

You do not have a solid foundation according to you. New information can alter all that
you have accepted as truth, without exception. So exactly what is your solid foundation,
of truth? Is it that you don't have a solid foundation?

I'm telling you for my part I believe God is real due in part to the universe around me,
since I do not believe it is eternal. Many people date it in the billions of years, but it
doesn't matter what date is applied to it, it is dated, and that means it hasn't been here
forever. So some now see this as an issue, so they say it is eternal, based on what?
Nothing I'm aware of in this universe today shows us that must be true, I'm open for
reasons for believing it to be eternal, but I have not seen any, just the musing of people.

Having the need to come up with reasons to dismiss God isn't anything factual, it is just
blinders in action if it were not blinders than God being real or not wouldn't even be a
desire to prove one way or another.

I believe God designed the universe, life, and everything else in it. I don't see anyone's
explanation as viable when looking at what needed to happen, from the start of life to
it's beginning, then as remarkable thriving and surviving throughout time.

So my faith isn't blind, it is insulting for you to suggest it is. Show me where I'm being a
hypocrite in this. I've laid out cause, and I'm told I'm blind due to my faith. What is up with
that?

Hell is another topic all together, and I'll defend my beliefs in that as I will anything you
ask me too. Just limit your accusations to my words, I am not here to defend anyone
else'.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
You do not have a solid foundation according to you. New information can alter all that
you have accepted as truth, without exception. So exactly what is your solid foundation,
of truth? Is it that you don't have a solid foundation?

I'm telling you for my part I believe God is real due in part to the universe around me,
since I do not believe it is e ...[text shortened]... you
ask me too. Just limit your accusations to my words, I am not here to defend anyone
else'.

"... I don't see anyone's
explanation as viable when looking at what needed to happen, from the start of life to it's beginning, then as remarkable thriving and surviving throughout time. "

In any version of existence where beings exist that ponder their existence, there will be some who think that they are really so special that they are the apple of a creator-god's eye. It's only natural.