Quote:
Originally Posted by metaphor-  yah i thought of that paradox to. If having no religion is what everyone believed, then eveyone would agree to that way of life and follow it, leaning towards the definition of a religion. |
having no religion is not a faith. even if it becomes the norm.
Quote:
|
People who do not believe in supernatural entities do not have a "faith" in "the non-existence of X" (where X is "fairies" or "goblins" or "gods"); what they have is a reliance on reason and observation, and a concomitant preparedness to accept the judgment of both on the principles and theories that premise their actions. The views they take about things are proportional to the evidence supporting them, and are always subject to change in the light of new or better evidence. "Faith" - specifically and precisely: the commitment to a belief in the absence of evidence supporting that belief, or even (to the greater merit of the believer) in the very teeth of evidence contrary to that belief - is a far different thing... (from Gotta have faith?)
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilya In this case you are not addressing seisen's point. You may be able to stop yourself from believing in God (though I'm fairly certain that you don't anyway), but in order to reach the state that you describe in your first post (no religion in the world), you would have to fundamentally change human nature. |
Human nature is adapting to survive. That most people nowadays have chosen faith as a way to adapt to their environment or to their lack of understanding of it, doesn't mean that religiousness is a fatality or a part of human nature.