To most people, faith is a positive quality. Perhaps it is, if "faith" is construed as "hope" or "positive thinking." As in, I have faith that I'll be able to make it to the top of this mountain.
You don't know if you'll be able to reach the summit, but you hope that you will. Nothing wrong with this.
Somewhat similarly, faith can be viewed in probabilistic terms. I have faith that my laptop will start up when I raise the lid in the morning, because so far it has every time I've done this.
But in his book, "A Manual for Creating Atheists," Peter Boghossian defines faith in a fashion that is how religions and other supernatural belief systems use the word.
faith
Pretending to know things you don't know
Ooh! Doesn't sound very positive, does it?
Faith is a deception, a disguise, an effort to fool other people (and yourself). For example, someone who has faith that God exists really is saying, "I'm pretending to know that God exists." Thus faith is a lot like a child pretending to be a princess when she really is just a non-royal four year old in her bedroom.
There's nothing wrong with pretending. Children can get so caught up in their role-playing that it seems real to them. However, when adults do this in the name of their religion it isn't so cute or harmless.
I liked how Boghossian has a table where he has expressions using the word "faith" in one column, and the same expressions with a substituted "pretending to know things you don't know" in another column.
This is a good way of pointing out how problematic faith is. Better to be truthful and honest with yourself and other people. Here's some examples:
"My faith is beneficial for me."
"Pretending to know things I don't know is beneficial for me."
"I have faith in God."
"I pretend to know things I don't know about God."
"Life has no meaning without faith."
"Life has no meaning if I stop pretending to know things I don't know."
"My faith is true for me."
"Pretending to know things I don't know is true for me."
"Why should people stop having faith if it helps them get through the day?"
"Why should people stop pretending to know things they don't know if it helps them get through the day?"
"Teach your children to have faith."
"Teach your children to pretend to know things they don't know."
Here's how Boghossian addresses the faith vs. hope/etc. question.
The term "faith," as the faithful use it in religious contexts, needs to be disambiguated from words such as "promise," "confidence,", "trust," and, especially "hope."
"Promise," "confidence," "trust," and "hope" are not knowledge claims. One can hope for something or place one's trust in anyone or anything. This is not the same as claiming to know something. To hope for something admits there's a possibility that what you want may not be realized.
For example, if you hope your stock will rise tomorrow, you are not claiming to know your stock will rise; you want your stock to rise, but you recognize there's a possibility it may not. Desire is not certainty but the wish for an outcome.
Hope is not the same as faith. Hoping is not the same as knowing. If you hope something happened you're not claiming it did happen. When the faithful say, "Jesus walked on water," they are not saying they hope Jesus walked on water, but rather are claiming Jesus actually did walk on water.
...Much of the confusion about faith-based claims comes from mistaking objective claims with subjective claims. Knowledge claims purport to be objective because they assert a truth about the world.
Subjective claims are not knowledge claims and do not assert a truth about the world; rather, they are statements about one's own unique, situated, subjective, personal experiences or preferences.
...Faith claims are knowledge claims. Faith claims are statements of fact about the world.
...The only way to figure out which claims about the world are likely true, and which are likely false, is through reason and evidence. There is no other way.
As humans it's pretty much a habit to 'pretend to know things you don't know'. But it goes a step further. Now forget you are pretending and instead claim that you REALLY KNOW!
So now it becomes: claiming to KNOW things that actually you clearly DON'T KNOW.
For example; I KNOW that my Master will come at the time of my death! Why? Because he comes to save all those who believe in him and TRY to do their meditation.
Clearly - it's all nonsense - there is no knowing - but the disciple has FAITH!
Let's take the example on Gordon Ramsay's USA nighmare Kitchens. Without exception - every restaurant owner KNOWS that "My food is good" when in fact the truth is "My food is absolute fu!?ing shit" (to borrow a word from Gordon that I would never use!)
Those people are DELUDED into thinking that they are producing wonderful food in spite of the clear evidence (empty restaurant).
They continue to assert their viewpoint even when an expert (Gordon) tells them that actually their food is crap.
Why does this happen? Because humans figure things out in their mind in a certain way (i.e. they make certain conclusions). As soon as the conclusion is made - the belief is then reinforced and considered to be true.
Now dropping that false belief becomes pretty near impossible. Why? because I KNOW that I am RIGHT!
I once read a joke on a post card in Las Vegas. It had written on it:
I am RIGHT. I am ALWAYS right. I have always been right. I will always be right. There was this ONE TIME when I thought I was wrong - but I was mistaken!
Of course the joke is that 'mistaken' is actually WRONG - but of course a person who is always right cannot admit that - so he must use another word - otherwise it questions his whole premise that he is right.
This runs deep in humans - once we make a conclusion - we live our whole life as if it is true. If my father followed RSSB - then I will consider that to be firm evidence and PROOF that it is the truth - because it MUST BE! And also my father claimed that he saw his master at the time of death - so that's it - it's definately the truth now!
These are the types of conclusions that people make - and they start to think that they KNOW this is the TRUE and REAL path to God!
Posted by: Osho Robbins | November 08, 2013 at 02:22 AM
Osho,
Good comment.
The knowing, when it comes, at best is going to be relative. I know my pickup truck is silver in color. I checked a color standard and confirmed this. We can observe a color and agree to give it a name. However, one day something can happen and that agreed upon color and it's given name can change. This is all good.
Posted by: Roger | November 08, 2013 at 10:10 AM
These are the types of conclusions that people make - and they start to think that they KNOW this is the TRUE and REAL path to God!
Folks who believe in God, the "real path to God", and other such nonsense attend Church of the Churchless because defending one's faith is more gratifying than preaching to the choir. This makes for a congregation composed of recovering believers (like the founder of this church) and preachers (like Osho) who, unable to draw their own audience, come to this church to prey.
Posted by: cc | November 08, 2013 at 10:36 AM
Some words on faith from How to Know God, the Yoga Aphorisms of Patanjali, translated and commentary by Isherwood and Prabhavananda.
From the commentary on sutra 20:
"'Faith' is often used by agnostics a a term of abuse. That is to say, it is taken to refer to the blind credulity which accepts all kinds of dogmas and creeds without question, repeating parrot-like what it has been taught, and closing its ears to doubt and reason. Such 'faith' should certainly be attacked. It is compounded of laziness, obstinacy, ignorance and fear. Because it is rigid and unyielding it can quite easily be shaken and altogether destroyed.
But this is not the true faith -- the faith which is recommended by Patanjali. True faith is provisional, flexible, undogmatic, open to doubt and reason. True faith is not like a picture frame, a permanently limited area of acceptance. It is like a plant which keeps on throwing forth shoots and growing."
The whole commentary on this sutra is quite beautiful.
Posted by: Luke Wilson | November 08, 2013 at 07:44 PM
Luke Wilson presented Patanjali's words:
"True faith is provisional, flexible, undogmatic, open to doubt and reason. True faith is not like a picture frame, a permanently limited area of acceptance. It is like a plant which keeps on throwing forth shoots and growing."
--Isn't that about the same as agnosticism...open to doubt and reason?
I know of a follower of a spiritual path who continues with it, despite doubts, just in case it happens to be true. But 2 1/2 hrs. of each waking day spent in meditation, and strict adherence to other practices related to it, is a lot to devote to something that may not be true.
By the way, how's Owen?
Posted by: tucson | November 09, 2013 at 01:06 PM
I’m sure that not all who ‘attend’ the C of the C are ‘recovering believers’. Possibly quite a few are folk who simply like to discuss issues that can’t normally be discussed with friends and family.
I don’t know about the USA, but here in the UK and much of Europe there are huge numbers of people who have never belonged to any faith at all. It is human nature to investigate and blogs like this explaining for example that 'faith is pretending' help to put things into perspective.
Posted by: Turan | November 10, 2013 at 02:18 AM
I’m sure that not all who ‘attend’ the C of the C are ‘recovering believers’. Possibly quite a few are folk who simply like to discuss issues that can’t normally be discussed with friends and family.
A few, perhaps, but most are believers who come to testify, preach, and defend their faith.
Posted by: cc | November 10, 2013 at 01:31 PM
I suppose you could describe the commentaries as from “. . . believers who come to testify, preach, and defend their faith”. But does this reflect the prevailing conditioning of a religious mind-set that needs to dismiss the non-religious by putting them into the same category? (i.e. as mere ‘believers’ in and ‘preachers’ of science).
(See the next blog)
Posted by: Turan | November 11, 2013 at 01:48 AM
cc,
"This makes for a congregation composed of recovering believers (like the founder of this church) and preachers (like Osho) who, unable to draw their own audience, come to this church to prey."
Not so sure about Brian (founder of this church), but Osho kind of just proved your point by posting the following:
"I have set up a facebook page - so anyone can comment on it and become part of our 'group'. it is called
www.facebook.com/TruthAboutSantMat
feel free to go there and post any comments
or start new discussions."
http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2013/11/four-good-questions-for-a-guru-gurinder-singh-dhillon.html?cid=6a00d83451c0aa69e2019b00f23e7f970d#comment-6a00d83451c0aa69e2019b00f23e7f970d
Posted by: VVIP | November 11, 2013 at 10:39 AM