Is it wise to believe something that is unprovable???
If it is the case that a statement is not provable then is it OK to place your faith in the truth of it?
For example; If I state that there is a purple dragon that lives in the center of the sun whom we cannot detect and, therefore, cannot prove exists is it any value to believe in it?
Tell me, why do we have value as humans? Or do we have value? If so, what gives us this value?
Hello Amber!
Interesting question. Do we indeed have value? Value is a relative term I think. What is valuable to one may be of little value to another. When you speak of humans value it would depend on what or whom we are asking. To each other we are very valuable I would think but to the universe as a whole, not very valuable it would appear. That is; if we were to be sucked into a black hole the universe would not change very much.
I mentioned value in terms of the value of believing in something that is unprovable. And here it is the value to an individual I am speaking of. Me, or you, would it be valuable to believe in the Purple Dragon when we have no way of proving it’s truth? I suppose if to believe made it true then there would be value in that. In other words if the act alone of believing in it made it a reality then doing so has value to us. But if not then is there value in it? Suppose believing in it made me happier then there is value in me being happier. Therefore value in believing it. But if I am only happier if it is really true then believing in it without knowing if it is true will not make me happier.
So, stay with me here, when you believe in something that makes you happier is it because you believe it to be true? And, is it the case that if it were not true then you would not be happier? So then does the value to you depend on the actual truth of the thing you believe in? In other words is there still value regardless of the truth of the belief? If believing in the purple dragon makes me happy regardless of whether it really exists or not then it still has value to me. But if the value erodes if the dragon does not exist then should I continue to believe?
So, that is my question, is it valuable to you to believe in something if the truth of it is unknown?
Hmmm… “value is a relative term”. So, it’s perfectly acceptable for me to believe, by your definition, that some people may not have value? I’m asking you strictly about human value, not about things outside that have value TO us or your opinion of our value in relation to the universe… just human value.
Do you believe what happened to 500,000 or more Tutsi people during the Rwandan Genocide was wrong? If so, why was it wrong?
Sidenote: I didn’t actually pose my question entirely in response to your initial post question and, in hindsight, I should have posted it in your most recent entry.
Christians do not believe their faith to be unprovable and faith, by definition, does not require tangible proof… “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” People exhibit faith in things every day, though we do not always have a tangible reason for that faith… our faith often extends from our experience. I could give plenty of examples but I’d rather focus on your response to the first half of my comment because it relates more to the core issue at hand, imo.
By ‘value’ you mean worth right? As in; does a human life have value? I think I understand you. I still think it is subjective. I, myself think genocide is a bad thing. Someone else may not. This does not mean that I agree with those who think genocide is OK. Logically, to me, it is a bad thing. I know I would not want it done to me and therefore do not condone it being done to others. So, it is not ‘acceptable’ to me for you to believe that some people may not have value. To me all people are valuable. So, to me, the reason genocide is wrong is that I myself would not like it or want it to happen to me, therefore, I do not wish it on others. It is logical.
You said, “Christians do not believe their faith to be unprovable” but yet you (I think it was you) said yourself you cannot prove it. That is why it is called faith. Is this statement not a contradiction;?? “Christians do not believe their faith to be unprovable and faith, by definition, does not require tangible proof.” If it is provable then why do you need faith? I don’t understand. Your quote, “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” is interesting word play and begs many questions. If you are sure of something do you need to hope for it? And how exactly does one go about being certain of something they do not see? So, if I hope that the Purple Dragon exists then faith can make me sure he exists and certain he does even though I do not see him. Is that correct? So, to be certain of something all I need is to add faith?
You are correct “people exhibit faith in things every day” but, I would argue, they DO have tangible reasons for doing so. We don’t always recognize or dwell on the reasons but they are there. Are you arguing we just randomly put our faith in things daily??? Things we do not have tangible reasons to put our faith in? And is this the reason you have chosen to believe in your faith? I don’t think this is true. You have reasons that are very tangible. I don’t think anyone believes anything without a reason. The reason may be tangible, emotional, physical or logical but it is still a reason. It is these reasons that I am interested and think warrant further investigation. What you put your faith in should be chosen wisely and with good reason. So far I have seen no religion that warrants my faith in it. You seem to have found such a religion so I want to know your reasons for believing in it.
So, back to my original question; I want to know that if the value of something depends on its truth then how can something be valuable that there is no way of knowing the truth of? And if you say faith is the method you use to know truth then there is a whole range of beliefs that the truth of can be gained in this way including believing in the Purple Dragon, Buddha, Allah, etc. Is there not a flaw in blind belief?
-Kermit
“By ‘value’ you mean worth right? As in; does a human life have value? I think I understand you. I still think it is subjective. I, myself think genocide is a bad thing. Someone else may not. This does not mean that I agree with those who think genocide is OK. Logically, to me, it is a bad thing. I know I would not want it done to me and therefore do not condone it being done to others. So, it is not ‘acceptable’ to me for you to believe that some people may not have value. To me all people are valuable. So, to me, the reason genocide is wrong is that I myself would not like it or want it to happen to me, therefore, I do not wish it on others.”
Why do humans have value to you? Where does this value come from? Why would genocide be wrong?
This value comes from my brain and it’s ability to gather information assess it and make a decision. My determination that genocide is wrong comes from this process. Where else to thoughts come from but the brain?
Ok, fair enough for you, or other adults, at least while you’re awake… but what about when you sleep? You are not able to gather information and make a decision when you sleep. Do you lose your value at this time? What about those with mental disabilities? What about infants who are not able to process complex concepts or make decisions? Do they have value? And how much capacity to think is required for someone to count as having value? In this case, I could easily say that I think “this or that person” doesn’t think enough or that they don’t make great decisions and must be lacking in brain functionality, and therefore they have no value, permitting me to eliminate them if I choose to do so. Would that be right?
A perfect example of this, by the way, is the Jewish Holocaust, where Jews were legally declared as sub-human… making it possible to claim that humans were not, in fact, killed at all. One group of people passed a law declaring that another group was not human. But, of course, we know that they are human! So what gives people value? Do we not inherit this value simply by being alive? And, if so, where does this value come from?
Yes, or, even a better case in America with black slaves. Our founding fathers didn’t even think of them as men when they wrote “All men were created equal.” Or women! I can’t believe how long they were not allowed to vote! Very true!
This value of each other simply makes logical sense and does indeed depend on the cognitive ability of whomever is thinking about it. In America it was not religion that made equal rights possible. It was the collective logical thinking by the majority that made it possible. And indeed you could say that we learned and became smarter and saw the flaw in thinking that whites were superior to blacks. We recognized our error in thought and its negative consequences to society and went about the process of changing the way we think. And, sadly, there are those that still do not understand the logic behind it.
I would say that yes, without a brain to think about value or process input and formulate complex ideas there is no value. That is, that there is not values on Mars because there are no people there. Someone who is mentally incapacitated in some way also lacks the ability to make valuable decisions. We see this with old people and accident victims. Others who have the cognitive ability to make value decisions for them do.
Values come from the brain and its ability to think. Nothing more. Hitler’s brain made an illogical decision proven out by his own un-doing.
Actually, by your thinking, might makes right. If one is of no value because they cannot make valuable decisions, then we might as well have killed off your kids the moment they were born… or you while you sleep, for that matter. With all due respect, this argument is completely lacking in logic…. BUT, since value is subjective in your opinion, I guess I could very easily set a completely different standard for what makes a human life valuable and there’s really nothing more you can do other than offer an opinion about it.
And, I hate to say it… but America was founded on the very premise that we have the rights we do because they were given to us by a “Creator”. If you take God out of this equation, then you may not have any rights at all… The bottom line is the founding fathers of America would not agree with you that it was a “collective logical thinking” that made these rights possible, unless that collective logical thinking also included that they were given by the Creator.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Do you have the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness? Under our law, you have those rights because they are endowed to you by a Creator. If you don’t believe in a Creator, then who is supposed to give you these rights? or perhaps you don’t actually have them… ?
If value is subjective, then nothing can stop me from pulling out a gun and shooting the person next to me… and it doesn’t quite matter because, without God, we’re all nothing more than high functioning “animals” and who says there is anything wrong with animals killing animals?
See, the Rwandan genocide and the Holocaust (or the attack on the World Trade Center for that matter) can only be considered “wrong” if God exists. Outside of God’s existence, might makes right and anyone is free to subjectively “take out” anyone they wish. After all, we’re all just matter so who really cares? Without God, there is no reason for me to keep from exterminating you, your kids or anyone else I wish. Without God, it is impossible for you to give me one objective reason why this would be wrong.
However, with God, we have value simply because we are alive, created and loved by Him… because God gives us this value.
I’d much rather live with an objective reason for human value than a subjective one.
As far as the proof of God’s existence… Well, I see proof in everything around me and these things lead me to have faith in a God that I cannot see with my finite eyes. It is scientifically and logically impossible for any amount of matter to begin without a force of movement behind it. Let’s say, millions of years ago, we only had one atom that began everything. Who created the atom? Where did it come from? What set it in motion to produce all that we now see around us? There is no proof that matter can exist without an original force to put it in motion. In fact, to say so, would be to deny science altogether.
By your screen name you indicate that you may believe in the existence of a “higher power”. However, your arguments do not make for that allowance. You also indicate that you want someone to make a sound case for believing in their religion. Until you understand that truth is not relative, you will never be able to understand faith. The reason I have chosen the religion I have is based first on the fact that there is absolute truth and second in seeking out the fullness of truth: containing consistency, logic, science, reason, and history. Faith is a matter of the heart where my experience with God has affirmed his existence and His love for me and for all. It’s not something one can be taught. It’s something you can only see if you are truly open to it.
Peace to you and yours…
Hmmm… I think we are not communicating optimally here. I do not think “might makes right” is logical and I do not think you do.
I think, correct me if I am wrong, that you believe everyone, non-Christian included, has the ability to be moral. Is that correct? Our brains have been given this ability by God and that is how you and I both find it logical to be good.
And, if this is the case, then I agree with you in so much as our brains have the ability to figure out right from wrong.
What I don’t agree with you on is that this ability is given by a God. All I claim is that we have this ability and that it does not logically follow that it came from God any more than it follows that it did not come from God. Are you arguing that it is logical that this ability came from God? If so what is your argument?
I will get to your other comments soon enough.
I like your comments!
-Kermit
You said:
“Without God, there is no reason for me to keep from exterminating you, your kids or anyone else I wish. Without God, it is impossible for you to give me one objective reason why this would be wrong.”
Then why do non-believers do good? Why do I do good if I do not believe in God? A simple objective reason is that your life and those around me benefits me. When I treat others with respect I get treated with respect and even greater adoration when I do really good things. It simply benefits me. Is that not an objective reason?
You then said:
“However, with God, we have value simply because we are alive, created and loved by Him… because God gives us this value.”
If God values me and that is what keeps you from killing me then why does it not follow that if a person values me, like my daughter, then that is also a reason not to kill me? Sounds like you are saying that it benefits you to not kill me because God said so. So, then it could also benefit you to not kill me because my daughter said so. Especially if she had a big gun!
People have value to me because it benefits me. The reason I am a positive contributing factor to society is because I understand the logical value in being such. There is a severe negative consequence for me if I were to go around randomly killing people. You wrongly assume that without a God life has no purpose or meaning and therefore we have no reason to be good. The fallacy in this argument is made evident every day when people who do not believe do good. With or without a God, it is impossible for you to give me one objective reason why this would be wrong.
-Kermit
You also said,
“Do you have the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness? Under our law, you have those rights because they are endowed to you by a Creator. If you don’t believe in a Creator, then who is supposed to give you these rights?”
Here you are just flat out wrong. We have these Rights because we, the people created the law. And we were able to do this because we were created. What force created us has nothing to do with the fact that we created the laws. If we were to accept your logic then the following would also have to be accepted:
Say I were to receive an anonymous present from someone. Then you claim you sent it to me at the same time my mother says she sent it to me. Both are equally viable reasons for me to receive this present so I have no way of telling who gave them to me. Then my mother claims that if I don’t believe she gave it to then it is impossible that I received it. It does not matter ho much she claims she knows she gave me the present. The fact will remain that it is possible she did not and that the existence of the present in no way proves her claim. Is this logical?
This is the argument you are using for our Rights. You are saying that because I do not agree that they came from God therefore there is no way I could have them. When indeed it is entirely possible that they came from a different source. It does not matter that you claim to “know” where I got them. The fact will remain that it is possible they came from a different source and the mere existence of these rights in no way proves your claim of their origin. I am not saying it disproves your claim just that it does not prove it.
Another thing you said:
“If value is subjective, then nothing can stop me from pulling out a gun and shooting the person next to me… and it doesn’t quite matter because, without God, we’re all nothing more than high functioning “animals” and who says there is anything wrong with animals killing animals?”
The answer to this is simple. WE DO!! We, the people, say that this is wrong! Our brains realize logically why this is wrong. And it does not matter if God made our brains understand this or some alien or Natural Selection made us understand this. The fact is WE do understand it no matter what the cause. There is nothing inherently true about being moral that demands it be derived from a God.
-more to follow.
No this statement is interesting…
“It is scientifically and logically impossible for any amount of matter to begin without a force of movement behind it. Let’s say, millions of years ago, we only had one atom that began everything. Who created the atom? Where did it come from? What set it in motion to produce all that we now see around us? There is no proof that matter can exist without an original force to put it in motion. In fact, to say so, would be to deny science altogether.”
Well, it is true that we live in a cause and effect world. But who is to say that matter has not always existed? I mean if every event needs a cause then doesn’t it follow that there must have always been matter before it and therefore proving that matter has indeed always existed? Is this not the very proof you say does not exist?
Also, if you are arguing that it does not make sense that something, matter in this case, could have always existed then how do you explain God’s existence?
And, conversely, if you are arguing that everything needs an original cause then what is God’s original cause?
hmmmm….
And finally you said;
“By your screen name you indicate that you may believe in the existence of a “higher power”. However, your arguments do not make for that allowance. You also indicate that you want someone to make a sound case for believing in their religion. Until you understand that truth is not relative, you will never be able to understand faith. The reason I have chosen the religion I have is based first on the fact that there is absolute truth and second in seeking out the fullness of truth: containing consistency, logic, science, reason, and history. Faith is a matter of the heart where my experience with God has affirmed his existence and His love for me and for all. It’s not something one can be taught. It’s something you can only see if you are truly open to it.”
First of all my arguments do allow for the possibility that there is a higher power. Though it is true that I do not think it is highly probable that there is one. And that is exactly why I am talking to you. You seem to have looked at the world and found it to be highly probable, no scratch that, certain beyond a doubt that there is a God. And I am hoping that you can show me where I have gone wrong in my thinking.
I do understand that truth is not relative as long as you are making decisions based on evidence and not on faith alone. It only becomes relative when it is based on faith. When you believe something that has no way of being proven it is now dependent on nothing external and solely something internal and that makes it relative to the individual who believes it.
You say you have chosen your religion based on absolute truth and seeking of the fullness of truth yet you are not very good at showing me evidence. This “absolute truth” looks more like “absolute faith” than truth at all. Don’t get me wrong, I fully accept that the Christian God might indeed exist but the evidence for it simply so far appears to be no greater than the evidence for the God of any other religion in the world and even the case for no God.
So far no one has shown me a sound case for believing in their religion. You have not shown strong consistency, logic, science, reason, or history that backs up your belief. But I am still listening.
I do care about you though and value your opinions and would not randomly shoot you or your children.
Oh, and about this quote…
“It’s not something one can be taught. It’s something you can only see if you are truly open to it.”
If it is not something that can be taught then how did you learn, wait uh, how did you… find out… um… become aware of… um gain knowledge… um …how did you become to believe in it? And what does “truly open to it” mean? How does one know when they are “truly open to” something? To be open to something means what? Willing to accept without proof? Willing to believe without seeing? Willing to accept what another one says regardless of your doubts? Willing to be taught about it? Willing to accept what the one teaching you says whether it makes sense or not? I thought it could not be taught? Is it absorbed somehow? Does God just download it to your brain? Is there no scrutiny from the brain? How did you come to believe it? Was there no reasoning involved? Open, truly open…. hmmmm… I must open my thoughts, heart and mind to what? The possibility of the truth? And if I can gain this belief without teachings then do I need to read the teachings of the Bible? Do I need to listen to preachers or others? Do I need to talk to God even? Would he not just be teaching me?
How can I go about being open to something and to learn about it if it cannot be taught? Where does one even begin?
Fascinating thoughts you have!