Is faith consistent with reason?

[Eve]

It also boils down to semantics, and flogging the horse of 'define-Faith'-ism...

 

There is but one religion on this planet that is practised worldwide, and has no God.

Buddhism.

Buddhism is founded on Logic and reason, but uses the word Faith also.

Faith in Buddhism can be better defined as a Confidence, and assuredness in the teachings, rather than a hope in their promise....

 

Buddhism and science work closely together, and scientists specifically involved in the workings and machinations of the brain, are coming to terms with the fact that Mind is a separate issue....

 

Faith in Buddhism is only consistent with Reason, because of the intrinsic definition.

 

I have come to see Buddism as an 'applied psychology' because of its reach in terms of psychotherapy. In this regard I am looking forward to reading 'Zen and the Brain' this summer because of the links between meditaion and the parasympathetic nervous system. Also, I have a film to watch at some point this week about the Dalai Lama.. I am hoping to finally discern why Buddism is termed as a religion, when clearly it is a philosphy.

 

Take care,

Eve xx

[dunstable]

Faith in Buddhism can be better defined as a Confidence, and assuredness in the teachings, rather than a hope in their promise....

TaraMaiden, I think the distinction you make between faith and confidence is a useful one. One could say that scientists have faith in their theories and hypotheses but it would be more accurate to say that they have confidence in them. Confidence implies more than hope, it implies a belief based on empirical knowledge that the theory or hypothesis is a sufficiently good approximation to reality to be useful in explaining or predicting.

 

Faith in Buddhism is only consistent with Reason, because of the intrinsic definition.

By "intrinsic definition", did you mean the definition of faith as confidence or did you mean something else?

[dunstable]

If one has faith in a particular doctrine- there is reason behind that belief for them. You can manipulate reason to fit your needs and mood.

Good point D-Lish.

 

Reminds me on the time I attended some lectures/discussions given by Creationist friends of mine who attempted to demonstrate that an unbiased scientist must believe in Intelligent Design based on the evidence. They saw no incompatibility between reason and faith but felt that faith flowed out of reason. Unfortunately, the evidence they presented was discredited pseudoscience from Creationist websites rather than mainstream data. By the time, the series of meetings was over I was all the more convinced that their beliefs were totally at odds with reason - an illustration of your point of manipulating reason to fit needs and moods. Strange thing was these people were scientists by education and training, so should have been able to discriminate between good and bad science, but I guess their judgment was overwhelmed by their need to come to a particular conclusion.

[TaraMaiden]

(. . .)

 

By "intrinsic definition", did you mean the definition of faith as confidence or did you mean something else?

 

Reason enables us to analyse and examine all the 'truths' we are presented with.

we therefore refuse to accept anything at face value, but instead test it and scrutinise it, and if it sits well with us, attempt to live by it, in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Buddha.

if things work to satisfaction, and we feel the proof of the pudding is not only in the eating, but is highly delicious, then we have faith - Confidence - in the Buddha's words.

 

We have used our Reason to come to the conclusion that what he said, actually fits the bill, and we can be confident.....

 

I have found, repeatedly, that if something doesn't work for me, when it has worked before, it's because I have screwed up.

The teachings remain reliable.

I'm the one who loses the plot.....

[TaraMaiden]

.. I am hoping to finally discern why Buddism is termed as a religion, when clearly it is a philosphy.

 

Take care,

Eve xx

 

care to tell all the monks and nuns, that they've been getting it wrong all this time?

 

The term Religion has not necessarily got to have anything to do with God.

see this definition from the Oxford online dictionary (particularly 2 & 3):

 

 

religion

• noun 1 the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. 2 a particular system of faith and worship. 3 a pursuit or interest followed with devotion.

 

— ORIGIN originally in the sense life under monastic vows: from Latin religio ‘obligation, reverence'

 

Then compare the definition of:

 

Philosophy

 

• noun (pl. philosophies) 1 the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. 2 the theories of a particular philosopher. 3 a theory or attitude that guides one’s behaviour. 4 the study of the theoretical basis of a branch of knowledge or experience.

 

— ORIGIN Greek philosophia ‘love of wisdom’.

 

Maybe we should call it a religiophy......

[mental_traveller]

Faith is irrational so yeah it's pretty much the opposite of reason.

[sally4sara]

It also boils down to semantics, and flogging the horse of 'define-Faith'-ism...

 

There is but one religion on this planet that is practised worldwide, and has no God.

Buddhism.

Buddhism is founded on Logic and reason, but uses the word Faith also.

Faith in Buddhism can be better defined as a Confidence, and assuredness in the teachings, rather than a hope in their promise....

 

Buddhism and science work closely together, and scientists specifically involved in the workings and machinations of the brain, are coming to terms with the fact that Mind is a separate issue....

 

Faith in Buddhism is only consistent with Reason, because of the intrinsic definition.

 

When I realized the religion I was raised with no longer fit, I still felt compelled to find a more appropriate religion to adhere to. Buddhism looked like the answer till I found evidence of gender favoritism. Is it across the board and intrinsic for buddhists to believe only men can come close to attaining true buddhism, or is that a cultural imposition that has no real basis within the teaching? I am truly curious as it is the only thing that offended me about it. I have a hard time believing any religion to have my best interests and a true benefit to my life while it considers half of our species to be a detriment.

 

Beyond that, I've come to believe "faith" to be a mutable concept. More often than not, it is the unprovable justification for a person or group to act on their wants.

 

Do this.

Why?

Don't ask!

 

So in my experience, faith cannot have reason.

[TaraMaiden]

When I realized the religion I was raised with no longer fit, I still felt compelled to find a more appropriate religion to adhere to. Buddhism looked like the answer till I found evidence of gender favoritism. Is it across the board and intrinsic for buddhists to believe only men can come close to attaining true buddhism, or is that a cultural imposition that has no real basis within the teaching? I am truly curious as it is the only thing that offended me about it. I have a hard time believing any religion to have my best interests and a true benefit to my life while it considers half of our species to be a detriment.

 

It's complicated.

There's a vast amount I could cite to illustrate the different opinions in different schools and traditions, but basically what it boils down to is this:

The majority of Buddhist traditions and schools consider this an anomaly, and disagree with it.

Tibetan Buddhism: (Mahayana Tradition)

The Dalai Lama is doing all he can to obliterate differentiation, but you must understand that contrary to popular belief, although he is a world-renowned Spiritual leader, he actually cannot reverse thousands of years' worth of prejudice overnight. But he is cognisant and trying. The Tibetan government, has, for example (pro-rata) the highest ratio of female ministers than any other political organisation.

There are some very well-known Tibetan Buddhist nuns who are not only prominent but highly respected, and well-known as authors of exceptionally good works.

 

There is a strong movement in Thailand and in Theravadan Tradition to reinstate and ordinate women as Bikkhunis (nuns) and restore an order.

I can give you links if you require.

 

There is the tale of the female Buddha Tara, who vowed to always be reborn as a female, in order to maintain her femininity, because once a being is enlightened, gender is irrelevant. before a being is enlightened, if they are on the Path to liberation - gender is irrelevant.

 

Much of what the Buddha implemented was actually designed to protect nuns from abuse, prejudice and maltreatment.

There is also evidence supporting the fact that much taught about women in Buddhism, was included or inserted after the Buddha's passing.

Again, I can get link references....

 

I do take your point about this bizarre anomaly, but as I said, it's a lot more complicated than it looks at face value.

I am female and I can honestly say I have never experienced ridicule, prejudice or condescention from anyone "high" or "low" in Buddhism due to gender.

Or for any other reason, for that matter.

Buddhiosts are aware it does not sit well. And many high-up Buddhists are working hard to rectify matters and redress the balance.

 

I hope this goes some way towards responding to your 'critique'. I take nothing away from it. I merely say that it's complex and deep.... I don't like it either, but truly, as a layperson, it does not affect me one little bit. If I were a woman aspiring to be a nun in a specific tradition, this would be possible. But the route currently, is circuitous.

[sally4sara]

It's complicated.

 

Indeed. And thank you for being so informative.

I will look to the information and leads you've already provided rather than ask you to do the work for me.

[TaraMaiden]

I am truly not trying to lead you in any way.

 

but if you want further info, please feel free to ask.

 

 

 

_/l\_

[wuggle]

Jeez, you Buddists , constantly trying to force your ideas on others..:D:eek:

[dunstable]

Jeez, you Buddists , constantly trying to force your ideas on others..:D:eek:

I think you meant that in the nicest possible way, wuggle! Personally, I read TaraMaiden's posts with great interest and I have considerable respect for Buddhism because it has a rich ethical base (unlike Christianity which I think is impoverished ethically). I love especially that Buddhism cares for all life, not just homo sapiens.

[TaraMaiden]

I think Wuggle is being humorous.

 

 

I told him to say that.......

[dunstable]

I think Wuggle is being humorous.

I think so too -- I didn't mean to suggest otherwise!

[FleshNBones]

I think you meant that in the nicest possible way, wuggle! Personally, I read TaraMaiden's posts with great interest and I have considerable respect for Buddhism because it has a rich ethical base (unlike Christianity which I think is impoverished ethically). I love especially that Buddhism cares for all life, not just homo sapiens.

Do you know anything about Christian ethic?

 

I believe Christianity is the only religion (no cults here) that elevates the common man. Being on par with insects is nothing to brag about.

[sally4sara]

Do you know anything about Christian ethic?

 

I believe Christianity is the only religion (no cults here) that elevates the common man. Being on par with insects is nothing to brag about.

 

Ahh, the ever present christian need to feel elevated above others.

 

How fulfilled could they be with such a need?

[TaraMaiden]

Do you know anything about Christian ethic?

 

I believe Christianity is the only religion (no cults here) that elevates the common man. Being on par with insects is nothing to brag about.

 

having been a Roman catholic christian for most of my adult life, I know quite a bit about christian ethic.

 

I prefer Buddhism.

 

How can you say a person is elevated if they are 'common'....?

 

Being on a par with insects is a lot to brag about.

For a start, they are likely to survive an atomic bomb.

Which is more than can be said for humans.

And they vastly outnumber us.

And they existed before humans did.

What's not to brag about?

 

We do not necessarily put ourselves on a par with insects.

But we do believe that they have as much right to be alive and function in their existence as we humans do in ours....

And before you start saying that some carry disease and pestilence - humans do a lot more damage than they do. And on a far greater scale.

[Eve]

Do you know anything about Christian ethic?

 

I believe Christianity is the only religion (no cults here) that elevates the common man. Being on par with insects is nothing to brag about.

 

Take it easy Fleah and Bones. Remember, there is no investment in what they say.. Christianity is a joke to them. Let them find out for themselves. I am a little concerned for you here. Dont get dragged in whatever you do Hun. Remember, faith is perfect in the regard that it cannot be faked.

 

I hear what you are saying though.. and fully understand.

 

 

Take care,

Eve xx

[TaraMaiden]

Excuse me: Christianity is most certainly not a joke to me.

If it is any way aimed at me, I strongly resent that remark.

 

Some so-called christians who purport to preach the word of God and are fanatical in their over-zealousness, are a joke - and not only to me. but to fellow christians, too.

And I'm afraid I have come in for a great deal of vilification, condemnation and ridicule at the hands of some christians.

So let us not start pigeon-holing people, please.

 

Many thanks.....

 

_/l\_

[Eve]

Excuse me: Christianity is most certainly not a joke to me.

If it is any way aimed at me, I strongly resent that remark.

 

Some so-called christians who purport to preach the word of God and are fanatical in their over-zealousness, are a joke - and not only to me. but to fellow christians, too.

And I'm afraid I have come in for a great deal of vilification, condemnation and ridicule at the hands of some christians.

So let us not start pigeon-holing people, please.

 

Many thanks.....

 

_/l\_

 

I would consider many of your comments condescening towards Christianity most definately if I were to dwell upon them. My concern was for the other poster.

 

I can see why you have had problems with Christians/Christianity.

 

Take care,

Eve xx

[wuggle]

Excuse me: Christianity is most certainly not a joke to me.

If it is any way aimed at me, I strongly resent that remark.

 

Some so-called christians who purport to preach the word of God and are fanatical in their over-zealousness, are a joke - and not only to me. but to fellow christians, too.

And I'm afraid I have come in for a great deal of vilification, condemnation and ridicule at the hands of some christians.

So let us not start pigeon-holing people, please.

 

Many thanks.....

 

_/l\_

 

I won't pigeon hole you Tara , I still love you even though you are a buddhist, and yes, was only joking earlier. (damned christians, take everything so seriously)

[FleshNBones]

Take it easy Fleah and Bones. Remember, there is no investment in what they say.. Christianity is a joke to them. Let them find out for themselves. I am a little concerned for you here. Dont get dragged in whatever you do Hun. Remember, faith is perfect in the regard that it cannot be faked.

 

I hear what you are saying though.. and fully understand.

 

 

Take care,

Eve xx

Enable your email option under the website settings, and I will gladly send you a private message.

 

The real argument ended on page #1. Spock should be the guru for every logic snob. What good are these guys if they can't stand up to fiction? Don't get me started on the facts.

 

All I've seen lately are just a bunch of lame testamonials. Mr dunstable has no pride.

[NoIDidn't]

Answering the original question: yes and no, it depends on the issue you are putting your faith in.

 

Look at this scripture: Hebrews 11:1 - Now, faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

 

Without getting lost in the "christian"-ness of the scripture, I think the definition suffices.

 

I think another poster pointed out that "faith" doesn't have to be tied to a religious philosphy at all. Many scientists exercise faith in the theory of evolution with everything they do. Science is certainly not a religious belief - well, not for most.

 

Why would anyone get a college education if they didn't have the faith that it would be a good investment in their future? Why would anyone get into a car and drive if they didn't have faith that the other drivers would (mostly) obey the rules of the road?

 

But getting a college education and degree is rational and having faith in the fact that its beneficial is also rational. So "faith" and "reason" don't have to be diametrically opposed unless the OP is using *faith* as interchangeable with *religious faith*. Some see religious faith as illogical, and thus the assumption that all faith is somehow irrational.

[dunstable]

So "faith" and "reason" don't have to be diametrically opposed unless the OP is using *faith* as interchangeable with *religious faith*. Some see religious faith as illogical' date=' and thus the assumption that all faith is somehow irrational.[/quote']

When I started the thread, I meant "faith" as "religious faith" but forgot to say so. And by "reason", I meant "rationality". Sorry for my carelessness in not defining my terms.

[FleshNBones]

When I started the thread, I meant "faith" as "religious faith" but forgot to say so. And by "reason", I meant "rationality". Sorry for my carelessness in not defining my terms.

I do it one more time.

 

The opposite of "religious" faith is "religious" doubt.

The opposite of reason is raw emotion.

 

Religious faith and reason are uncorrelated. Imagine a 2-dimensional plot with religious faith on one axis and reason on the other.

 

Hint hint... Prejudice is irrational.