Author
|
Topic: virus: Trust versus Faith (Read 3286 times) |
|
simul
Adept
Gender: 
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
 
 
|
 |
virus: Trust versus Faith
« on: 2003-12-19 12:21:52 » |
 |
OK, I've been doing a lot of work in this area since this discussion started.
I encourage you to "try on" these definitions in your reading and in your life to see if/how they work.
I know that they are not the "ultimate" definitions, nor are they the "only" definitons. However, they are powerful and effective ways of thinking about the issues of trust and faith.
A strong distinction between trust and faith brings clarity and simplicity into Virian thinking.
Trust:
1. "a rational expectation of a particular result or behavior based on prior experience" as in "he can be trusted to arrive on time"
2. "a reasoned expectation of honesty and overall good behavior, based on prior interaction" as in "I trust him like a brother"
Trust without a basis in experience, logic or reason is Faith.
A Virian might be cautious not to confuse these two terms and remain present to this power that this distinction offers.
Faith:
1. "an expectation of an outcome based on expedience or necessity, rather than experience" as in "I had no time to test the program, so I had to run it on faith"
2. "an unreasonable or illogical expectation of an outcome intended to inspire others in that outcome and produce results" as in, "Ghandi had faith in a free India"
Faith, defined in this way, is clearly useful in specific circumstances.
A Virian who is understanding in these uses of trust and faith can employ them as tools in appropriate situations.
NOTE: These memetic distinctions are crafted so as to empower the person who uses them in their life. They are not intended as "truth" or to be "dictionary correct" definitions.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
metahuman
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 212
Reputation: 4.12
Rate metahuman
|
|
Re:virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #1 on: 2003-12-19 14:01:54 » |
|
The problem with having separate definitions than the rest of the world including me is that it will make communication impossible. If you're living alone with no contact with anyone at all (like the non-Tarot hermit), then personal definitions are okay. Otherwise...
"I'm big, you're small. I'm smart, you're dumb. I'm right and you're wrong and there's nothing you can do about it." -- Danny DeVito in Matilda. ;p
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #2 on: 2003-12-19 17:43:08 » |
|
This is an assumption that you are making. I contend that my definitions will actually improve your ability to communicate, since they are more clear.
Please try out these definitons in you life for, say, a week or so. If they don't work for you, and you're not completely satisfied that your ability to communicate has improved, then go back to the original ones.
Are you willing to try it?
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
metahuman
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 212
Reputation: 4.12
Rate metahuman
|
|
Re:virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #3 on: 2003-12-19 17:53:25 » |
|
I will not and cannot "wear" your definitions for I do not trust, I do not have beliefs, and I rarely make assumptions. Perhaps, I do theorize as I recently did, but a theory is not an assumption.
Your definitions will not improve the ability to communicate.
I'm really getting pissed off at you now. You don't seem to understand that by trying to justify trust as rational you are proceeding in the same direction that the fucking Christians do all the time when they say that belief in God is rational and non-belief is irrational.
Trust is defined as faith. That's all it is. It's just another way to say "faith." It's not that hard. Say it with me now: trust is faith, faith is trust. There is no difference between the two. If you don't like it, quit speaking English.
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #4 on: 2003-12-19 18:49:19 » |
|
If you choose to live you life as if trust and faith are the same thing, that's fine.
I've spoken to dozens of people on this topic and most of them find that my definitions are clear, functional and largely accurate.
You can tell when someone is collapsing the two terms, as you have, by examining the context.
Metahuman: it's OK for you to define them that way. It just weakens the usefulness of the two words, IMHO. I will keep that "blending of terminology" in mind when reading your posts.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #5 on: 2003-12-19 18:50:35 » |
|
If you choose to live you life as if trust and faith are the same thing, that's fine.
I've spoken to dozens of people on this topic and most of them find that my definitions are clear, functional and largely accurate.
You can tell when someone is collapsing the two terms, as you have, by examining the context.
Metahuman: it's OK for you to define them that way. It just weakens the usefulness of the two words, IMHO. I will keep that "blending of terminology" in mind when reading your posts.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #6 on: 2003-12-19 23:05:01 » |
|
You assume that these definitions are not effective, and you have said that you don't want to experiment with them to verify for youself whether they are, indeed, useful as I have claimed or uncommunicative as you have claimed.
Because you objected so strongly, I've spoken to dozens of people on this topic and most of them find that my definitions are clear, functional and largely accurate.
Someone pointed out that "trust is earned". But, I think this can be extrapolated from my definition.
I agree with you that many people have attempted to confuse these two terms in an effort to prove God. I contend that merging the terms, as you want to do, leaves them open for continued abuse.
Prove your point:
Please use my terms, as I defined them, to prove that belief in God is rational.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
metahuman
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 212
Reputation: 4.12
Rate metahuman
|
|
Re:virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #7 on: 2003-12-20 07:11:34 » |
|
"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence that it is not utterly absurd; indeed, in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible." -- Lord Bertrand Russell.
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing." -- Lord Bertrand Russell.
****
Honestly, I don't have to prove a god damn thing if you'd take your lazy ass to a search engine and do like an intelligent person would: research. Mr. Jew, if you're going to continue you're little self-serving crusade, fuck you.
The problem with your assertion is that you claim that trust is useful. IT IS NOT USEFUL. IT IS RATIONALLY IRRELEVANT. Why do you persist in trying to make useful that which is not? I know the answer. It's self-serving to do so. You've made it quite clear that the only reason why you want to justify trust as a rational tool (which by the way does not exist; trust is not a decision and only decisions can be rational or irrational) is because you have made irrational commitments to things based on trust. You are illiterate and unintelligent. If you can't think deeply enough, don't try to present your views as the word of your Jewish God.
If you would do your fucking research, your fucking definitions have been falsified many times over by many different people.
Why do you even come here? You're still a Jew. You're still the same stereotypical Jew that you described: elitist, arrogant, and ignorant.
David asked if I have a problem with Jews. My answer: Yes, I sure fucking do. I have a problem with anyone who is god-fearing or god-following. I have a problem with anyone who pretends to be what they're not. I have a problem with you for many different reasons.
Go fuck yourself, simul.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.77
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #8 on: 2003-12-24 11:08:01 » |
|
Quote from: simul on 2003-12-19 12:21:52
I encourage you to "try on" these definitions in your reading and in your life to see if/how they work.
|
I've been trying out Simul's suggested redefinitions of trust and faith and they do indeed represent a useful distinction, not unlike previous suggestions to redefine knowledge and belief along similar lines. I agree it is very important to distinguish between the rationally and irrationally justified when it comes to assumptions and expectations.
We have a few choices though: 1) we can redefine common words (not so much redefine them as narrowing their previous meaning to a small subset of their previous definition), 2) we can make a habit of always qualifying the terms with an adjective (saying "rational belief" instead of just "belief"), or 3) we can make up new words for the concepts.
We also have to consider the audience in our choice. For example we can assume that with sufficient effort we can redefine old words within this community, but there is no way we can have that same effect on the public at large, at least not unless or until the CoV becomes a major memetic force on the order of Christianity. So we use different terminology for internal and external communications? That would certainly be a hassle.
Another option that being an online organization affords us is the possibility of hyperlinking all "problematic" words to a definition in the CoV lexicon. This will give us most of the advantages of the different options mentioned above, at the cost of an extra effort from the author (which can be minimized through more technology).
Any thoughts on which way is best?
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.56
Rate simul
I am a lama.
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #9 on: 2003-12-24 14:08:27 » |
|
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
Walter Watts
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1571
Reputation: 8.64
Rate Walter Watts
Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
|
|
Re: virus: Trust versus Faith
« Reply #10 on: 2003-12-26 22:00:52 » |
|
Just a little memetic poison from the sorcerers of old....
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hebrews 11:1 says:
Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not
seen.
*******Bullshit!********
Walter says:
Evidence is the substance of things seen, faith is the hope of things
not seen.
Erik Aronesty wrote:
> OK, I've been doing a lot of work in this area since this discussion started.
>
> I encourage you to "try on" these definitions in your reading and in your life to see if/how they work.
>
> I know that they are not the "ultimate" definitions, nor are they the "only" definitons. However, they are powerful and effective ways of thinking about the issues of trust and faith.
>
> A strong distinction between trust and faith brings clarity and simplicity into Virian thinking.
>
> Trust:
>
> 1. "a rational expectation of a particular result or behavior based on prior experience" as in "he can be trusted to arrive on time"
>
> 2. "a reasoned expectation of honesty and overall good behavior, based on prior interaction" as in "I trust him like a brother"
>
> Trust without a basis in experience, logic or reason is Faith.
>
> A Virian might be cautious not to confuse these two terms and remain present to this power that this distinction offers.
>
> Faith:
>
> 1. "an expectation of an outcome based on expedience or necessity, rather than experience" as in "I had no time to test the program, so I had to run it on faith"
>
> 2. "an unreasonable or illogical expectation of an outcome intended to inspire others in that outcome and produce results" as in, "Ghandi had faith in a free India"
>
> Faith, defined in this way, is clearly useful in specific circumstances.
>
> A Virian who is understanding in these uses of trust and faith can employ them as tools in appropriate situations.
>
> NOTE: These memetic distinctions are crafted so as to empower the person who uses them in their life. They are not intended as "truth" or to be "dictionary correct" definitions.
> ---
> To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--
Walter Watts
Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
"Reminding you to help control the human population. Have your sexual partner spayed or neutered."
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
Walter Watts
Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!
|
|
|
|
Logged
