Sunday, May 26, 2013

Response to a Joss Whedon quotation

Whedon’s quotation brings up an interesting point: the word faith has two meanings, and we should be precise about which one we mean when we use it. Let’s take a closer look, and see how well the term applies to theists and humanists.

In one sense, faith is belief. Faith means accepting as true a claim for which the evidence is not conclusive. I personally believe that the Earth orbits the sun, that Barack Obama is President of the United States, and that I need oxygen to survive. These claims are not up for debate; the evidence in their favor is conclusive, and so these particular beliefs do not constitute faith.

I also believe that the 2008 New York Yankees were the greatest baseball team of all time, that brains are awesome, and that OJ did it. I believe that I will succeed in life. These claims are very much up for debate; the evidence in their favor is inconclusive, and so these particular beliefs might satisfy the criteria for faith. Rather, they would if I believed them without doubt, or at least to an extent not justified by the available evidence. As a pain-in-the-ass skeptic, I don’t.

In another sense, faith is practice. Faith means behaving as if something were absolutely true because our humanity dictates we do so. Faith is the way we make decisions that do not warrant a rational approach. For example, I am intensely loyal to the people I love. If someone in my family, or my girlfriend, were involved in a conflict, I would take their side without hesitation. This is not rational: a strictly rational actor would weigh costs and benefits, right and wrong. Concepts like “fairness” and “consequences” would come into play.

So, which of these meanings applies to religious faith? Would a theist lay down money that G-d exists? Or would she simply be inclined to live her life according to a religious paradigm, epistemology notwithstanding? I don’t have an answer to this question because I’m not a theist.

I would however argue that only the second meaning applies to humanism. As a humanist I have faith in humanity. I believe it’s important to strive to improve the human condition, whether or not humanity deserves it; on the latter point, I remain agnostic. 

2 comments:

  1. I have some friends who regularly invite me to convert to their religion. They say that if I am sincere enough in my search for the truth, the veracity of their message will be revealed to me.

    Of course, what this means is that heads, I need to maintain an open mind to their truth because I might get that 'feeling' today. Tails, I was never open minded enough and that's why I rejected their religion.

    I cannot see how this can count as faith - doctrines that are designed to be unfalsifiable. It would seem that most of what we describe as faith in the vernacular today falls under this criterion.

    But I can see how it is human to accept such doctrines (having been there myself). (Thankfully) there is nothing precluding the faithful from standing side by side with humanists in practice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds right to me - some forms of dogma stack the deck in their favor. Your last point, about standing together, is something I find immensely reassuring.

      Do I know you?

      Delete