[MD] Faith/Skepticism

[Michael Poloukhine]

> ?[Michael]
> > Again: faith = affirmation absent proof.
> 
> Ron:
> You seem to be implying abstract symbols which have no correspondance
> with experience. Math and God may fall into this catagory. Quality, as we
> understand it, and I have stated before, is experience. You experience
> do you not? you react to your environment do you not? these are "proof"
> of quality. We bathe in the proof of quality at every moment.
> This is not faith this is be-ing. did you have to have faith to be born?
> must you have faith to hunger, to sleep, to deficate?

MP: No, no and again no. You, along with the rest, continue to miss my point 
about the two definitions of faith and how it relates to my point. 

www.dictionary.com

faith
-noun
1.         confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.         belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would 
be substantiated by fact.

I admit, agree, affirm and believe as you all seem to that one does not have to 
*have* "faith (definition 1)" *in* Quality to experience it or even affirm it. 

I am saying it *takes* "faith (definition 2)" *to* affirm that these experiences are 
what they are as a result of Quality (as understood in the MoQ) rather than just 
experiences in SOM.

This seems to me to be a very simple linguistic distinction to make and I am a 
little taken aback at just how [reluctant or incapable?] you all are to make it. You 
are all pretty intelligent by my observation, and that leads me to the conclusion 
that the failure to make the distinction is one of reluctance; an intellectual 
decision NOT to make the distinction, hence static.

MP
----
"Don't believe everything you think."