Faith and Calculation (a Sinrebirth production)

I would say that it is possible to have faith and to calculate both.

For when you calculate you are in a sense putting faith into your ability to do so.

And when you have faith in someting, you have to be cautious about it and take things the right way.

- originally posted by rev, moved from the main Debate Hall thread

Thank you, Moonshadow.

Rev, if you have faith and caution, are you not calculating your faith, and in turn calculating??

Very true Fred, though some say "Religion is only the truth that is popular" - What we have faith in was popular, thus it survived. Now with declining religions....we will have to see.

So Fred, would you call yourself faithful, or calculating? Ditto to Reva?

So you contain to unconcilable natures?

Useful, if not a little difficult

Ditto with me, Rev. Faith does not come as easily as calculation - but I suppose that is a side effect of our education and thinking-polarised society...

Exactly. But is this a fault of society, or a good thing?

Society is always changing? The faces perhaps, but the overall view remains much the same, to me.

I was raised in a very closed and guarded way. Yet I am able to see the perspective of others without great difficulty. As much as nurture plays a part, it's clear that nature is very strong, too.

Faith can come easily, to some. Or not at all, to others. Just like other abilities and talents.

Uh, explanation please? From the briefness, it looks like you contradict yourself.

What is society, to you? Individualized to countries or regions?

To me, it's humanity. And while we grow up, and perhaps learn new things, it's the same. Exploitation and self first. Values like Murder, theft, and personal attacks are the same, if enforced differently.

i think people are generally good, but exceptions are easy to see especially because we tend to look for them. your comment was a bit cynical, fred. too much machiavelli perhaps? for my taste anyway. i won't disagree that there are people like that, but i do tend to think they are more frequently the minority with power, rather than majority of people or society in general.

and to the overall question, i suppose by definition it's one or the other, but for me personally i feel it is very important to have both. everything in life cannot always be explained by math and science, but to ignore reason for faith completely seems a bad idea as well. it makes people very easy to control.

perhaps i'm unrealistic, but i like to think that there are a lot of people out there who are concerned about the well-being of others... and that i just don't see them when i become frustrated with humanity.

yes, people have to take care of themselves, but that isn't a bad thing. i think the people willing to step on anyone to get their way regardless of the consequences of their actions are a minority. but a very visible one. you know? it's easy to see that kind of thing, but it doesn't mean the majority of people are like that. but the fabulous people who demonstrate genuine concern for those around them don't get the recognition they deserve.. and they don't ask for it either, so sometimes it's a bit too easy to miss how many of them are out there.

I've missed your confusing rants, Imp, good to see you are still here to baffle and redirect.

To give this a shot, my recent reading for my Philosophy class compared the views of Kant and Mill. One for 'Respect for persons' and one for Utilitarianism. The first viewpoint views each person as more than just a means to an end. I'd go into detail, but I honestly don't know if I follow it all just yet. The second, is a belief that the choice should be made based on which choice results in the greater or greatest happiness of all involved.

Which is more important, being right in our own eyes...or being right for more of us?