Last night over a couple of beers I got into a heated discussion as to the nature of faith. When you fight about a word like that it always ends up coming down to semantics.
Mr Wizard insisted that he only has faith in things that he can empirically prove. I suggested that based on that statement science was his religion, since there is no way he's personally empirically proven every theory or law that is out there. At some point you rely on the demonstration of others.
To this he disagreed. No, he only believes in proof. So I suggested that most likely then he doesn't believe in love. To which he disagreed, as he had experienced love and therefore knew it was real.
But isn't every love different? When do you actually know vs trust that love is there? What empirical demonstration of love is there?
It was a very frustrating conversation. And now after looking up the definition of faith I know why.
There are a few interpretations...but essentially all revolve around confidence, trust, belief, and fidelity. And btw all demonstrate a complete lack of proof. As in the whole point of the word is to be devoid of testimony.
This just makes me sad. The idea of not having faith in anything seems kind of tragic. Where is the sense of wonder, surprise, mystery?
So to cheer myself up I decided to list the things that I have faith in.
- the innate goodness of people
- losing socks in the laundry (where do they go??)
- murphy's law
- the power of positive thinking
- Kermit the Frog
- my ability to succeed if I try
- last year's monster attack in Central Park
- crazy romantic love
- without pain there is no growth, the light at the end of the tunnel is worth the struggle
- Elvis lives!!
The History Of Yoga
5 months ago