What a remarkably silly and bigoted point of view. It assumes that the only kind of "faith" is of the stupid religious variety.
We all learn through having faith in those who teach us. We are frequently in a position of ignorance and have to trust the competence and integrity of those who present themselves as knowing what we don't (it can be as simple a matter as getting directions in a strange town, or conducting research.) We cannot go through life challenging every statement on the basis that if we haven't checked it for ourselves we won't believe it.
Faith of course can be misplaced and should never be used as a substitute for reason, but without it we become paralysed. Should I go and see this new film everyone's talking about? It might be no good. The reviwers might be in the pay of the film company. My friends might not share my tastes. But if I decide to see it I'm going to have to trust something, if only my only hunch that it's worth spending an evening watching it.
Many people look up to mentors, wise persons, whose judgement they trust; and you could argue that a Christian does this in respect of the cumulative wisdom (if such it is) of the New Testament. If your mentor's judgement later proves faulty you lose respect for him, and if you don't like what the Bible says that's fine. But the idea that there is some virtue in having no faith, in trusting simply to empirical data and your own highly imperfect judgement is pathetic and immature. I think the writer actually means "indoctination" in which case I agree with him but he or she should learn to use the language correctly.
What a remarkably silly and bigoted point of view. It assumes that the only kind of "faith" is of the stupid religious variety.
ReplyDeleteWe all learn through having faith in those who teach us. We are frequently in a position of ignorance and have to trust the competence and integrity of those who present themselves as knowing what we don't (it can be as simple a matter as getting directions in a strange town, or conducting research.) We cannot go through life challenging every statement on the basis that if we haven't checked it for ourselves we won't believe it.
Faith of course can be misplaced and should never be used as a substitute for reason, but without it we become paralysed. Should I go and see this new film everyone's talking about? It might be no good. The reviwers might be in the pay of the film company. My friends might not share my tastes. But if I decide to see it I'm going to have to trust something, if only my only hunch that it's worth spending an evening watching it.
Many people look up to mentors, wise persons, whose judgement they trust; and you could argue that a Christian does this in respect of the cumulative wisdom (if such it is) of the New Testament. If your mentor's judgement later proves faulty you lose respect for him, and if you don't like what the Bible says that's fine. But the idea that there is some virtue in having no faith, in trusting simply to empirical data and your own highly imperfect judgement is pathetic and immature. I think the writer actually means "indoctination" in which case I agree with him but he or she should learn to use the language correctly.
As it was on the 'atheistmeme' website. I think most readers would have taken the "stupid religious variety" as read.
ReplyDelete