From: exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Faith
Date: 4 Oct 92 18:54:46 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson in North America.
              The opinions expressed are strictly those of the user and
              not necessarily those of Ericsson.

In article <1992Oct4.062107.12619@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
>Subject: Re: Faith
>Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 06:21:07 GMT

>In article <fTq3rz2@quack.sac.ca.us> pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
>>>Faith is neither true nor false.  Only statements of fact (propositions)
>>>can be true or false.  Faith is an extrapolation of past experience (or
>>>some other type of belief system not based on experience, senses, or the
>>>real world), so it can come in many different flavors, some rational,
>>>most not.
>>I'll buy that. Yo, KEN and ERIC! You's gots problems with that?

>Well, yes.  I'm not really sure what different things you're calling faith.
>The description above seems to call any belief faith.  Furthermore, it
>appears to exclude propositions as faith, and you have used a definition that
>appears to include them.

>>No, it was this idiot, what can I say. But maybe you are right. So, YO,
>>ERIC and KEN, WAKE UP! What do you guys think about faith based on
>>inductive logic?

>I have no idea, since your meaning for "faith" is unclear.
>--
>"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
>the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
>disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

>Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
>     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)

The most salient difference between belief and faith, as I have said before, 
is the component of valuation involved in the faith attitude, and which is
not present in the belief attitude.  Compare: 

	A. I believe it's going to be a good day for a picnic.
to
	B. I have faith it's going to be a bad day for a picnic.

The only way one could utter 2 would be ironically. Without a special 
backround context, B wouldn't make sense.  In the same way, I could not, 
except as a joke, say that it was my faith that one day all my friends would 
turn against me and destroy everything I cherish. But one could hold this
*belief* and say that he believed such a thing would happen.   Faith and 
belief, I think, have the same epistemic or noetic structure.  Both can be 
based on evidence and involve an emotional element of sureness or 
confidence [subjective certainty] which may vary in intensity; both express 
the absence of fully evidenced knowledge.  

The difference can be seen in the way the two words are used. The word 
'belief' is used more to make guarded assertions by implying that one isn't 
in a position to know or that one is not in fact in possession of sufficient 
evidence to say "I know"; the word 'faith', while it does this too, 
expresses in addition a committment to the desirability of the object of
the faith attitude.
//////////////////////////////////////
/* Kenny  *   Welcome to Mind Wars! */
//////////////////////////////////////