Originally posted by Tzeentch._
I agree with the notion that everyone lives their lives by faith in the intangible, to varying degrees, for comfort. If you genuinely have no faith in variables that you can't quantify then you'd never step outside your door, unless you simply didn't care whether you live or die."
Or have any sort of relationship with another human being.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
No, because the statistics state that a plane clash is still possible. Ergo, having zero fear that the plane you're on might nose-dive at any minute and kill everyone on it, including you, is a baseless assumption.It's an assumption most of us make, though, for the sake of feeling better.
ok, but if something only happens 1 in 1000000 times, isn't it rational to think it wont happen to you? I get that being absolutely sure is impossible, but I'd hardly say people are flying in jets based on faith. It is a fairly reasonable assumption based on the statistics.
More specifically, what most people will tell you, if you're afraid of flying, is that you shouldn't worry because airplanes are painstakingly maintained and airplane mechanics are some of the best world. That's what people have told me my entire life anyway, as I'm afraid of flying.
I've always found that line of logic to be odd, though. Even though it's true that airplanes are generally well-maintained by mechanics, there are documented instances of planes crashing due to negligence, or simply mechanical failures that couldn't be predicted nor prevented. So really, when you get on an airplane, unless you yourself go out of your way to personally inspect that airplane yourself, you have no way of knowing whether the plane you're on was properly maintained and inspected prior to your boarding. Even if you did, you have no way of knowing, for sure, that the plane won't suffer a mechanical failure and crash once you get on it.
Yet, you board the plane anyway. That's faith in the unknown.
Originally posted by Oliver NorthSure, but an assumption, even a reasonable one, is still an assumption. And it's an assumption that you absolutely have no way of being sure about.
ok, but if something only happens 1 in 1000000 times, isn't it rational to think it wont happen to you? I get that being absolutely sure is impossible, but I'd hardly say people are flying in jets based on faith. It is a fairly reasonable assumption based on the statistics.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
More specifically, what most people will tell you, if you're afraid of flying, is that you shouldn't worry because airplanes are painstakingly maintained and airplane mechanics are some of the best world. That's what people have told me my entire life anyway, as I'm afraid of flying.I've always found that line of logic to be odd, though. Even though it's true that airplanes are generally well-maintained by mechanics, there are documented instances of planes crashing due to negligence, or simply mechanical failures that couldn't be predicted nor prevented. So really, when you get on an airplane, unless you yourself go out of your way to personally inspect that airplane yourself, you have no way of knowing whether the plane you're on was properly maintained and inspected prior to your boarding. Even if you did, you have no way of knowing, for sure, that the plane won't suffer a mechanical failure and crash once you get on it.
Yet, you board the plane anyway. That's faith in the unknown.
Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that you're operating on an assumption that you have no way of knowing is true. Probability =\= prescience, no matter how much the odds are in your favor.
ok, I get what you are saying 🙂
I have some trouble flying sometimes. I found it reassuring to remember that most pilots retire rather than die on the job, not sure if that will help you.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._...really?
I don't really see how the statement "I'm not depressed by life because I believe that when I die I'll go to heaven, even though I have no empirical evidence to support this notion" is any different than "I'm not afraid of getting on this airplane because I'm confident that it won't crash, even though I have no empirical evidence to support the notion that it won't."
Stoic, you're completely missing the point.
Christian Fundamentalists need not follow every tenet of the Christian faith or agree with your interpretation of Christianity to qualify as "Christian fundamentalists".
You might disagree with calling them Christian, but Christian Fundamentalist is a lot easier to say than "violent extremists who assert that they are members of the Christian faith"
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Stoic, you're completely missing the point.Christian Fundamentalists need not follow every tenet of the Christian faith or agree with your interpretation of Christianity to qualify as "Christian fundamentalists".
You might disagree with calling them Christian, but Christian Fundamentalist is a lot easier to say than "violent extremists who assert that they are members of the Christian faith"