Amarok is playing...
Navigation
Search
User login
Syndicate
This Sunday: Good Faith - Bad Faith
Submitted by Rolf on 17 June, 2007 - 08:28
Faith has become a controversial topic in recent years. The term "faith-based" is used in the media frequently to describe organizations or initiatives that are associated with religious belief. We hear that governments, educational institutions and even the U.S. military have embraced the concept that faith should guide decisions and policy. The word faith, used in this sense, refers to the type of faith that is associated with the religious belief in a deity. But there is more to the idea of faith than this narrow view of faith as it pertains to religious belief. The terms "good faith" and "bad faith" are commonly used to indicate whether one’s actions or motives have integrity. I’d like to draw the following distinction between good faith and bad faith:
Good faith is the faith that allows us to confidently carry on in our daily lives. It is the faith that something will occur in the future based on our past experiences. Because one has evidence that a set of conditions has resulted in a certain outcome in the past, one can have faith that the same conditions will lead to a similar outcome in the future. When I lift my right foot to step forward, based on past experience, I have faith that the ground will be there as my foot descends. I have faith that my house will still be there when I come home from work each day. I have faith that the person driving beside me on the freeway will be alert and follow the rules of the road. Without this everyday unconscious faith in the world around me, I could not function as I do now.
Bad faith is the faith that something will occur in the future merely because you want it to. Perhaps you have faith that something will occur because of family tradition, someone of authority told you it would or you read somewhere that it would. The defining characteristic of bad faith is that it is not based on evidence. It is a faith that is based on wants, needs, superstitions and, if evidence is considered at all, erroneous evidence.
Author of The Meme Machine , Susan Blackmore discusses bad faith in the article entitled We of Little Faith.
- Faith is corrosive to the human mind. If someone genuinely believes that it is right to believe things without reason or evidence then they are open to every kind of dogma, whim, coercion, or dangerous infectious idea that's around. If someone is convinced that it is acceptable to base their beliefs on what is written in an ancient book, or what some teacher tells them they must believe, then they will have no true freedom of thought; they will be trapped by their faith into inconsistency and untruths because they are unable to throw out false ideas when evidence against them comes along.
So, here we are, in the year 2007, with major government, educational and military organizations influenced by religious faith when establishing policies, imparting information and carrying out actions that effect us all. We live in a society that is becoming increasingly based on the bad faith of a small minority of religiously influenced leaders. Without supporting evidence of any kind, the ideas found within a 2000 year old book, written in a pre-literate, pre-technological time, are being used as a guiding force in major world influencing decisions. Does this sound rational? Does this bad faith deserve our respect? When Ms. Blackmore addresses these questions, she resoundingly says no. I couldn’t agree more.
- 1150 reads
Precisely
That's exactly what those of the faith don't understand when arguing about how atheists are just as irrational as themselves. Essentially good faith boils down to trusting that one's senses are accurate enough that what you perceive really exists. That's it.
Now that ontological leap of faith, albeit a large one, is at least verifiable any time by going and consulting your local physicist, who can tell you that, say, your keyboard is made up of atoms, which in turn are made of, protons, neutrons, electrons, which in turn are made of quarks etc.
That faith is a good faith, necessary for day to day functioning in the world. Faith in our senses is necessary to our survival, and I haven't met anyone who doesn't possess faith in his or her senses to the degree that I could carry on a simple dialogue.
Faith in the Abrahamic god however, is at present, entirely misplaced. If some piece of evidence came along that could verify Abraham made a pact with god for eternal progeny, some physical record of a conversation between the two, then maybe it would be time to reevaluate. But until then...
Wrong definition of Faith
I also posted something very similar as a comment elsewhere recently.
You are conflating 'faith' in the theological sense with the "Douglas Adams Version" of "faith" as 'unquestioning belief in the absence of evidence'. No mature Christian or Jewish theology requests unthinking unquestioning belief in God without evidence. Indeed, a great deal of Thomistic theology is the use of logic to demonstrate evidence for the existence of God.
In the realm of religion 'faith' has its older meaning - trust and loyalty. Sure, there is a presupposition of belief in, but it is a separate issue. Within context, it refers most specifically to the covenants between God and Man that are at the heart of Judeo-Christian religion - 'faith' is steadfastness to a partner. Thus, God is said (Deut. 32:4) to be 'faithful' toward *Man*, i.e., He will remain steadfast in his part of the covenants. This is the same meaning we use to describe a person being 'faithful' within marriage - the person is not violating the covenant of marriage, they are being loyal and steadfast to their partner.
Thus, 'good faith' *really* means 'with the intention of being faithful - in other words, being honest and trustworthy' while 'bad faith' *really* means 'with the intention of violating an agreement - lying, being untrustworthy'.
I have no issue with the use
I have no issue with the use of good faith / bad faith to indicate trust vs non-trust. I do believe that, in my post above, I made the statement, 'The terms "good faith" and "bad faith" are commonly used to indicate whether one’s actions or motives have integrity.' Does this not indicate that I have an understanding of the difference between good or bad faith when used in this way?
I am drawing the distinction between a rational faith necessary for daily functioning in life and irrational faith in the supernatural when I distinguish good faith from bad faith; small "f" faith vs large "F" faith, if you will.
Nor do I
In fact, I think I am acting in good faith, that is "with the intention of being faithful -- in other words being honest and trustworthy" when I trust that my hearing and vision (and other senses too of course) are accurate enough for my day to day functioning in this rather complex world.
That's enough faith for me, any more and I think I'd be interfering with my ability to function day to day.
I have recently come out of a
I have recently come out of a relationship that i know that i walked into in 'bad faith' - i am not proud of this fact but my question is how does one regain the loss of integrity they exhibited in acting this way.
Integrity?
When you say "integrity", are you talking about how you view yourself or how others view you?
Post new comment