Reality Vs Belief

[Plenoptic 0]

Ok well in history class the other day this was brought up. I thought it was pretty interesting. It had to do with like the topic says Reality vs Belief. I may refer to the Bible a bit because I'm Catholic but these are just examples. If you remember people once thought that Earth was the center of the universe. The Bible said it so people thought it must be true. Well Copernicus discovered that it can't be true and that we actually orbit the sun. This was also found by Galileo who showed that the Sun wasn't perfect like Aristotle said it should be. Although this was a great discovery people refused to believe it even though there was mathematical evidence to prove it. The same occured when they found things don't move in a straight line and gravity is what pulls us in an ellipse around the sun. They didn't believe it because of what their religion says. I'm sure things like this still occurs today, maybe not with space but with other things. But do you think that becuase belief's say something it is true? In most religions these things were written many years ago without the technology we have today so it is ok if it is wrong because they had no way of knowing. But I think they could just use new found knowledge to improve rather than argue against it. What are your thoughts?

[truefusion 3]

The Bible said it so people thought it must be true.

I don't ever recall the Bible mentioning such a thing, whether explicit or implicit. Could you provide the verse(s)?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_system

 

Also: Isaiah 40:22, Job 38:33.

[pixieloo 0]

The Bible is never wrong because God wrote it. Plus, I don't think the Bible says that Earth is the center of the universe.Belief affects everything. How and what you think are going to affect how you live your life. But, just because you believe something does not mean it is necessarily true.

[husker 0]

Let's not go into another religion debate. What the Bible says is probably true. Beliefs are very important to many people, so they have to agree with it. It's not like someone is going to some up and say, "Sorry, Noah's Ark never existed." Although it could be true, no one would believe it. It's a matter of what history has thought in a way. People won't change there beliefs simple because they are positive sure there beliefs are correct. Sometimes we don't want to accept reality.

[arnz 0]

What the bible says is probably true, but then again I'm a non-practising catholic that only attends church twice a year (at Easter and at Christmas). But still I dont tend to get myself in those type of belief/reality type debates.But still, reality/beliefs in other subjects are questionable and are taken/considered as it eventuates.

[morosophos 0]

The beginnings of truth start in curiosity. Curiosity is the driving force by which humanity explores the nature of the world, looking for answers regardless of foundation. For instance, religion has no logical basis, yet it still lives on in the world, whereas gravity has logical basis in Newtonian physics. Despite their differences in basis, they are both the children of curiosity, and they are both accepted widely by their audiences. When mass propaganda (e.g. "The sun orbits the earth") is pervasive, it is also widely accepted as the truth. Perception is in all cases the standard of evaluation; philosophers scritinize superstition and scientific fact alike based wholly on human experience. From human perspective, therefore, there can only necessarily be the truth that is perception.If one steps outside the human psyche, however, there seem to be two distinct truths. There is the truth that everyone widely and readily (common truth), and there is the objective truth that never ceases to be true, whether it is discovered or undone by fallacious beliefs of humans. The latter, however, is irrelevant because truth as understood by man can never extend beyond his observation, and even if he should claim to unite his own observation and what he supposes is objective truth by proofs, he must assume that his proofs have objectively true premises, and the premises have true postulates in turn. The only truth than can possibly concern anyone is the truth related to perception.One might also consider that there are two kinds of conceptual truth. What if, for instance, there is a widespread intentional lie that pervades a community? One truth is held by those who spread the lie, and those at the butt of the lie percieve a different reality. Truth is true, as is obvious, but it is also necessarily the highest grade of truthfulness possible. Because it is at the same time possible for humanity to grasp a higher kind of truth than that of the lie, the truth covered by the pretense is reality, while the lie itself is a lie. However, those who take in the lie will still believe it to be the truth. The truth is then subjective to the unfortunate receivers; Vladimir Lenin stated once: "A lie told a thousand times becomes the truth." However, reality always remains that which is hidden by the lie. Ironically, the perjurers may not possess the objective truth, being ultimately false themselves.

[truefusion 3]

For instance, religion has no logical basis. . .

Religion is wisdom. How could it be wisdom if it were illogical? What cannot be understood gets rejected, and gets claimed as false or untrue. It gets rejected due to lack of understanding. Just cause one can't understand, doesn't make it false. We just need to change our way of thinking.

[arnz 0]

True in regard to Religion is wisdom, but there are many variations of it out there, it can seem somewhat difficult to the average joe to choose which one to even believe!