Persistence-sustained effort necessary to induce faith

Exactly the type of response I intended to get with this thread.

carebear said:

...But, in spite of the fact that reason can take me only so far, I choose to have faith in that other person. Reason would leave me uncertain, forever looking for a sign to mistrust, never truly trusting in fact. My faith is not blind, it is supported by reason, but reason alone cannot rationally lead to absolute trust in another fallible person....
.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm confused why you would WANT to have this level of "faith' in another "fallible person". Your decription of your faith just seems like denial to me.



jazzbass

Lincsong said:

Faith is a positive, fear is a negative.
Reason is used as a crutch for those who have no faith. Reason is used to justify the negatives and not the positives.

Click to expand...

How did you arrive at that? Reason means using critcal thinking skills and analyzing a situation accurately and thoroughly. Justifying only "negatives" would hardly be a reasonable analysis.

It seems like you're redefining words as you go along just to support your statements.




jazzbass

Lincsong said:

This thread is not about religious faith. I never intended it to be and don't intend it to go in that direction. What I intended this thread to be about was using persistence in order to achieve faith in oneself in order to achieve a set of goals and overcoming obstacles.

So if a person sets out to achieve a goal, how persistent will that person be, and what types of persistence does he use in order to achieve his goal?

Click to expand...

Maybe you should have titiled the thread "persistence in achieving one's goals."


faith

n 1: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality" [syn: religion, religious belief] 2: complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust" [syn: trust] 3: institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him" [syn: religion]


persistence

n 1: the property of a continuous and connected period of time [syn: continuity] 2: persistent determination [syn: doggedness, perseverance, persistency, tenacity, tenaciousness, pertinacity] 3: the act of persisting or persevering; continuing or repeating behavior; "his perseveration continued to the point where it was no longer appropriate" [syn: perseverance, perseveration]
WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
On-line Medical Dictionary, © 1997-98 Academic Medical Publishing & CancerWEB






jazzbass

jazzbass said:

I guess I'm confused why you would WANT to have this level of "faith' in another "fallible person". Your decription of your faith just seems like denial to me.



jazzbass

Click to expand...

Never been in love? Heck, forget love.

You'd never get married (even for strictly monetary reasons), sign a business contract, get a mortgage, or even fly on a commercial aircraft if you didn't, in the end, rely on a not-directly supportable by reason faith/trust in others performing their jobs/duties correctly and as promised. Contracts provide deterrence and a recourse for betrayal but not enough to typically even get back one's losses. The ultimate risk of a mechanic's or pilot's (or fellow driver's or et al's) negligence is death. Logically/rationally/reasonably the feeble protections of contract or criminal law cannot outweigh the risk involved.

Like it or not, you rely on "faith" daily. Life has too many variables to crunch the numbers accurately.

Lincsong said:

The basis of persistence is the power of will. Will-power and desire, when properly combined, make an irresistible pair. The majority of poeple are ready to throw their aims and purposes overboard, and give up at the first sign of opposition or misfortune. A few carry on despite all opposition, until they attain their goal. How persistent are you in life and what do you do to attain that for which you are peristent?

Click to expand...

You also have to be able to see when something not working. You need to be flexible enough to change your approach to achieve your goal. Theres a big difference between being blindly stubborn and being persistent.

carebear said:

Never been in love? Heck, forget love.

You'd never get married (even for strictly monetary reasons), sign a business contract, get a mortgage, or even fly on a commercial aircraft if you didn't, in the end, rely on a not-directly supportable by reason faith/trust in others performing their jobs/duties correctly and as promised. Contracts provide deterrence and a recourse for betrayal but not enough to typically even get back one's losses. The ultimate risk of a mechanic's or pilot's (or fellow driver's or et al's) negligence is death. Logically/rationally/reasonably the feeble protections of contract or criminal law cannot outweigh the risk involved.

Like it or not, you rely on "faith" daily. Life has too many variables to crunch the numbers accurately.

Click to expand...

I know what you're saying but I think of that as "trust"--maybe we're just having semantic issues. I DO trust people, but never 100%. That would seem foolishly naive.




jb

carebear said:

Never been in love? Heck, forget love.

You'd never get married (even for strictly monetary reasons), sign a business contract, get a mortgage, or even fly on a commercial aircraft if you didn't, in the end, rely on a not-directly supportable by reason faith/trust in others performing their jobs/duties correctly and as promised. Contracts provide deterrence and a recourse for betrayal but not enough to typically even get back one's losses. The ultimate risk of a mechanic's or pilot's (or fellow driver's or et al's) negligence is death. Logically/rationally/reasonably the feeble protections of contract or criminal law cannot outweigh the risk involved.

Like it or not, you rely on "faith" daily. Life has too many variables to crunch the numbers accurately.

Click to expand...

My faith in these things is based on past performance. It's not a perfect predictor of future performance, but it's the best indicator. What we think of as faith or trust in these instances is really the sum of our observations.

I don't think persistence is a good thing to apply to love interests. If I'm interested in someone, he doesn't have to persistently pursue me. That's just creepy.

I'm okay with calling it a mostly semantic issue. A lot of discussions end up that way.

As far as the sum of past performance goes, yes, that is the rational reason to decide to trust someone, but it does not guarantee continued performance and can be faked. At a certain point you decide that the rational evidence is sufficient and go on trust from there. If new evidence comes to light you can reexamine your choice, that's sensibly tempering faith with reason. Deciding to trust without absolute knowledge, thats tempering reason with faith.

Even when you reduce the issue down to a concrete, no variable missed, set of odds, say 9 out of 10 times, the actual choice is made in trust that you'll not hit the 1 outside chance on your one and only chance to make that decision. You can't really "play the odds" in life, as opposed to mathematical theory, because you don't get 10 identical tries at anything (you can never step twice into the same stream and all that). It would only be a truly rational decision if you absolutely "knew" the outcome, due to the potentially high risk of failure.

Quantum physics, chaos theory and gambling all point us to a concrete, wholly secular limit on reliance on "pure reason".

"There are more things on heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

To my mind it's the (at this time science-wise anyway) intangibles that make life worth living.

Keep posting, Matt, it's terrific!:eusa_clap And, Jazzbass, I am a firm believer in critical thinking skills, I was raised that way. Your points about examining evidence, judging with reason the facts, not blindly, but with eyes wide open is without question a sane approach. Where we may disagree is that I believe those very skills can accompany a person's journey to faith/trust in a religious, or even non-religious context. Both faith/trust and the use of reason can co-exist. Where they may produce opposite conclusions to a person, one will ascend over the other. In my case, clearly faith/trust conclusions prevailed, but I have not surrendered rational thought. My school of religious trainning uses the terms majesterial use of reason versus ministerial use of reason. The first is the hallmark of humanism, the second of the beliefs I hold.

dean

jazzbass said:

I DO trust people, but never 100%. That would seem foolishly naive.




jb

Click to expand...

And you're smart for thinking that way. We are all human, and will at some time or other make mistakes and let people down. But to have no faith, I would think a person would become extremely bitter. To have faith is to have hope, and that is what spurs us all on, to conquer the goal set before us, when engaging in a new friendship, having faith in the person to keep your trust and you learn to trust them more and more.

mysterygal said:

To have faith is to have hope, and that is what spurs us all on, to conquer the goal set before us

Click to expand...

To draw this back closer to linc's original intent, this is a telling point.

Because we are fallible, our reason can be fallible as well. We all "know" our limitations but (and I'm sure this holds true for all of us) are often surprised by what we can actually accomplish when we persist.

I think about my Marine training. In the pressure and pain and weakness of the moment, I knew I couldn't make it up Mt. Mother. The appearance of one of my drill instructors, at the moment I was thinking about quitting, spurred me on to continue. I got my second wind and completed the climb, actually dragging others along.

From that and some similar moments, on, I truly learned that most limitations, physical and mental, are self-created. And this is where faith in yourself, based on past performance (just like faith in others) comes in.

If you have faith in your ability to accomplish tasks, because you have been able to accomplish other things in your life (support by reason), you will tend to accomplish them. Even things that could have had you sitting down at the start if you merely looked at the odds or likelihood of success. (though as Paddy pointed out, you may need to modify your approach, always flank your obstacles)

The key reason-wise is to master it. I have a pretty good head on my shoulders, if I want to logically rationalize anything, I can. I can take counsel of my fears and provide them a crippling argument to use against myself. Inaction being easier than action. I see this crippling other ntelligent people all the time.

Sometimes I have to look at my argument and just dismiss it. If I sit there and argue with myself I get nowhere (being my own perfect nemisis mwa-ha, mwa-ha ha ha ).

So I "dream the impossible dream*" and decide just go for it (on faith) based on my previously demonstrated ability to pretty much do anything I put my heart into (reason). Trusting I'll make it this time too.

*(saw Man of La Mancha on Thursday, they premiered a new tour up here)

Agreed. There is so much power in what we think and feel about ourselves. Another point I feel that needs to be made is that we're not meant to go about life on our own. We need those kinds of people when we're discouraged and losing hope to come along beside us and spur us on, encourage us and renew our motivation.

mysterygal said:

We need those kinds of people when we're discouraged and losing hope to come along beside us and spur us on, encourage us and renew our motivation.

Click to expand...

Never been face to face with an enraged drill instrctor, have you?

All I have to do now, coming on 15 years later, is remember them. that's enough motivation for me.

jazzbass said:

I DO trust people, but never 100%. That would seem foolishly naive.
jb

Click to expand...

I too trust people in this way. If we didn't have some trust in those that surround us, whether they are our closest friends and family or the driver in the car next to us on the highway, we'd not only be incredibly stressed out, probably thinking that most everyone is out to get us, but also I know if I couldn't put trust in these people, I don't know how I'd leave the house.

I now can see more clearly the difference between faith and trust. I don't know why, maybe it's because I haven't been all that religious lately, but I had a different understanding of faith, that wasn't always based on religion. I guess I now understand that all of those times I truly believed I had faith in something, I really was just trusting it/them.
Like I said, I haven't been all that religious lately, I know this thread isn't about religion, but I do hold my faith in certain things very near. However, I'm not sure that I could actually have trust in someone/something without having a touch of faith in something more. Conversely, I think that having faith requires trust, either in a higher power or something else, like a friend.
Argh, I wish I could explain myself better, this can be incredibly confusing
CareBear, you seem to have this concept down. For me, I keep going around in circles. I also believed that I could have faith in something without bringing the idea of the supernatural into it. But, the faith that I have in certain things/persons isn't something tangible that can be felt or seen, it is more of a sense. Then I think that I can't possibly put trust into something without having faith that the trust I have is worthwhile or won't lead to something going wrong.

I have faced many obsticles in my life that I have gotten through with strong faith in something and a deep trust in a group of people. I have 2 incureable illnesses. I have trust in my team of doctors that they will do everything in their power to make sure my illnesses are controlled. I have faith in something else that with the trust I have in my doctors, although incureable, the illnesses will be controlled. This faith is what keeps me strong. It gets me out of bed on the mornings when pain is overwhelming. It gives me the strength to deal with long hospital stays. It keeps me motivated, it helps me to cope. It tells me I can do anything that I put my mind to, even if that is filled with a field of obsticles.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that both of these entities are important, and they provide me with what I need to push myself through what I thought were insurmountable road blocks.
I'm really enjoying reading your ideas on this topic. It seems, for me, that my belief is really based on the situation it pertains to. You all are giving me a lot to think about. Just a few minutes ago, I was thinking that I could have faith in something/someone without a belief in what we can't see. I'm still not entirely sure this is correct, it is just my opinion. I do have a better, clearer definition of both of these things. But, I don't always base my thoughts on exact definitions. Sometimes there is an ideal of something that doesn't actually pertain to the exact definition of that something.
Sorry if this is confusing, as you can see, I'm a bit confused
CareBear and Mysterygal, I agree with both of you and your ideas of the topic.

Those who have cultivated the habit of persistence seem to enjoy insurance against failure. No matter how many times they are defeated, they finally arrive up toward the top of the ladder.:eusa_clap

Sometimes it appears that there is a hidden Guide whose duty is to test men through all sorts of discouraging experiences. Those who pick themselves up after defeat (faith in their ability) and keep on trying, arrive; and the world cries, "Bravo! I knew you could do it!":eusa_clap The hidden Guide lets no one enjoy great achievement without passing the persistence test. Those who can't take it simply do not make the grade. Those who can "take it" are bountifully rewarded for their persistence. They receive, as their compensation wahtever goal they are pusuing. They also receive something more important than material compensation--the knowledge that "every failure brings with it the seed of an equivalent advantage.

My husband kept this on his desk until he recently retired; (I do not know who penned these words, perhaps one of you might?)

"It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, SO THAT HIS PLACE SHALL NEVER BE WITH THOSE COLD AND TIMID SOULS WHO KNOW NEITHER VICTORY NOR DEFEAT."

Etienne said:

My husband kept this on his desk until he recently retired; (I do not know who penned these words, perhaps one of you might?)

"It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, SO THAT HIS PLACE SHALL NEVER BE WITH THOSE COLD AND TIMID SOULS WHO KNOW NEITHER VICTORY NOR DEFEAT."

Click to expand...

Teddy Roosevelt - the only progressive worth listening to.

Thanks, Matthew, I just wrote that on the paper the quote is on! BTW, I really enjoy your posts; you express your thoughts well and I appreciate your insights.

Daisy, it seems what you're talking about is discernment, and not everybody has it. It is how you say, without any tangible reason for trust in a person, you know they can be depended upon. I too, can tell after meeting a person who's trustable and who I should keep at a distance. I've never been wrong with those I trusted right off. I think some of it is instinct as well, it comes out most strongly with my children, sometimes without outside explanation, I just know not to bring my child to a certain place or let them be babysat by a certain person.