-Francis Bacon
Throughout history, most philosophers have held some kind of religious beliefs. Is it true that humankind is dependent on empirical evidence for intuition/faith? Or does it actually stand accurate the other way around (we rely on intuition/faith for our practical convictions)?
As I’ve previously mentioned, it’s very tricky to trust in anything (or at least believe in anything firmly) without substantial tangible evidence. To have faith in a conviction wholeheartedly without any physical substantiation is a true test of one’s devotion; it often takes years of practice trekking through murky waters find one’s true self, and (when successful) results in wisdom beyond many people’s comprehension and which only few will know.
For individuals ground in faith, many are very infrequently seriously stirred by any of the endeavours to challenge their beliefs; but oftentimes they do find themselves re-examining the truths, placing their faith in abeyance so to speak, until the doubt is trounced. And then everything is fine and dandy until the next qualm arises.It’s true that this is very much more to faith than simple logical assessment of evidence (such as knowing/feeling a real connection with God), but it’s still a very testing obstacle to have a purely faith-based existence.
As a Christian myself, I believe it is normal for people to seesaw between uncertainty and faith. If there actually is this "true faith in God" then there is certainly not as much of a need to lay so much reliance on our rational capabilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment