It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by RANT
Originally posted by lilblam
You don't have to believe that it will work, you simply KNOW that it has a high chance of working!
You just described every belief system. I can't KNOW something will work and not believe it also.
KNOWING something has a high probability isn't really knowing anything at all. It's a belief. I KNOW it worked in the past, so I BELIEVE it will work now.
Originally posted by Milk
Originally posted by lilblam
If you know something, then it cannot be wrong unless you were wrong. But if you are wrong, that means you never really knew it in the first place, but assumed you did.
Isnt assuming like believing? If you were positive that you knew something, but ended up not knowing, is it not safe to say that you believed it was true? The definition of assume itself contradicts everything that you have said.
Assume: To believe to be true without knowing. To presume or take for granted.
Believe: To be convinced of, know or feel that an idea or situation or way of behaving is true.
from: The Newbury House Dictionary of American English.
Dont those sound very similar to you?
[Edited on 8-1-2004 by Milk]
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Originally posted by lilblam
That's their mistake. They assume truth based on evidence. Why not have a GOOD CHANCE based on evidence and past knowledge, but not TRUTH. Truth is only ONE, and it's 100% true no matter what. If it is a TON of evidence, it can still be falst in the end! Talks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck, but it's just me in a duck costume with duck perfume *Quack!*
These people I'm talking about did exactly what you're talking about. They criticised the wright brothers based on their evidence and past knowledge
I can't rememberthe site right now, but I'll have it for you today or tomorrow.
Originally posted by Milk
Sounds a lot like you BELIEVE that "Belief in absolutely anything, for any reason, at any time, is absolutely unnecessary and ignorant."... Do you KNOW that, or do you ASSUME you KNOW that?
Originally posted by Kano
Hrm, perhaps we can best answer this by following the hypothesis through.
If we run with the hypothesis that there is no time that belief is necessary. It would infer that it is not necessary to believe anything. Would it be possible for us to function if we never believed anything?
It seems fairly obvious that not believing anything would be a rather impossible way to go about your business. It follows that there must be times when it is necessary to believe.
Originally posted by LeenBekkemaa
Originally posted by Kano
Hrm, perhaps we can best answer this by following the hypothesis through.
If we run with the hypothesis that there is no time that belief is necessary. It would infer that it is not necessary to believe anything. Would it be possible for us to function if we never believed anything?
It seems fairly obvious that not believing anything would be a rather impossible way to go about your business. It follows that there must be times when it is necessary to believe.
I follow Kano.
Originally posted by lilblam
You know though, based on evidence that I have, this whole belief thing is a system of purposeful control. The controllers are creating spirituality, new age, religions, other beliefs, and set them slightly different to allow for opposition. They require humanity to be in blind belief and to be DEVOID of any TRUTH. And anyone who argues for LACK OF TRUTH but instead thinks DECEPTION AND LIES are important, I'd have to beg to differ.
Question: Belief is blind faith in someone's statement or an idea that is not based necessarily on any evidence. Sure it can have evidence, but does that merit for belief? The reality of our world with the controllers is NOT my belief, it just is a logical deduction based on observation and research, and also it can be TOTALLY WRONG. It is a possibility, just like the inventor of a lightbulb was doing calculations and saw a possibility and had an idea. He didn't BELIEVE that the lightbulb would necessarily 100% work as he expected, but he had plenty of evidence to suggest it MIGHT. Why do I need to believe anything when I can just research and see where things lead? Why assume I found the answer!
For example: Scientists see the universe expanding so they say it might've started with the Big Bang. That's a theory, an assumption. It's not a belief, it's a logical deduction based on observation. They are not claiming THAT IS what it truly is, they just said that BASED ON OUR EVIDENCE that is a POSSIBILITY. That is all I say. There are many possibilities and some have more evidence than others. Some things are completely 100% known to be true without exception. Others are only backed up by evidence.
Sadly, many things are assumped to be true without any possible evidence, and they have an ARMY of people backing this up. Religion. They are composed of people who KNOW it's a deception but promote it for the sake of getting rich, and others who truly believe it, but without any reason.
Who do you think is smarter, the people who KNOW for a fact that religion is based on lie sandwiches, or those who believe it's true and live their life by it and pray to their invisible God. I'm not asking who is right, but who indeed is wiser.
Originally posted by jammerman
Prove belief? Can you say Oxymoron? It is futile to try to prove anything to someone who won't "believe" in anything. However, the exercise is valuable so I'll indulge.
Belief's are something that are built on prior experience. I don't go petting Grizzly bears, because although I have never seen one, other people have shared with me that it will likely maul me or injure me in some way. I also don't stick my hand on a hot stove burner, because prior experience shows that this is painful. If I am unfamiliar with something due to lack of prior experience, I will openly investigate. Other's will retract through fear of the unknown.
Your approach to "belief" seems to be built on some kind of concept of separation from experience which again doesn't make sense. Our beliefs are built upon our experience (at all levels). Sometimes there are experiences that occur that are completely internalized and subjective. I can only share with you how GOD or some experience has changed my life, but you have to open yourself up to the possibility for YOU to experience something similar. It'll never be exactly the same for two separate people or even an individual. Also, you're "belief" in what I tell you is based upon our relationship. You trust those which you know have spoken truthfully to you in the past or are known to do so and hence believe them. Beliefs direct us. They are the root of the decisions we make (mostly subconsciously). You HAVE TO BELIEVE to even be on this messageboard. If you had no belief, no action would be possible for action is belief manifested.
I do like the fact that you're thinking about this though. Keep searching... but try to do so with an open mind and honest heart. Eventually you end up where you're supposed to (IMHO). May I suggest you try something experientially? Try doing something based totally on Faith... the highest form of trust. Try opening your heart to GOD and see what He speaks to you in your heart. Good luck in your search
Peace,
+Jammer
Originally posted by lilblam
And that's the problem isn't it? Why does evidence have to convince you of truth?
Just see stuff for what it is, EVIDENCE. And POSSIBILITIES. But why assume it's true! How much evidence did it take to convince someone that God exists? Imagine how much evidence it could take to convince them afterwards that God, infact, does NOT exist. That's almost impossible for some people after their belief is strong enough. Belief tends to ignore evidence to the contrary!