Return to Answer

Faith provides meaning beyond the material from an external source. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no external meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

More examples

If you were a terrorist recruiter of suicide bombers, responsible for selecting children to indoctrinate religiously so that they will one day blow themselves up, would you rather choose children that you perceive as psychologically strong, or children that you perceive as weak? I think weak children would make for easier prey.

Same goes for adults. When charismatic people start new cults, they usually start recruiting among people which are mentally weakest, people who are in a personal crisis and thus most easily swayed.

Faith provides meaning beyond the material from an external source. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no external meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

More examples

If you were a terrorist recruiter of suicide bombers, responsible for selecting children to indoctrinate religiously so that they will one day blow themselves up, would you rather choose children that you perceive as psychologically strong, or children that you perceive as weak? I think weak children would make for easier prey.

Same goes for adults. When charismatic people start new cults, they usually start recruiting among people which are mentally weakest, people who are in a personal crisis and thus most easily swayed.

Another problem with faith is that it can easily lead to contradictions of science (though not necessarily). As an example the famous rejections of a heliocentric worldview or the theory of evolution based on faith show a "weakness" in reasoning rationally about nature due to faith. Possibly more a weakness of scripture or religion, but faith plays it's part in training people to accept and (fervently) support statements out of faith instead of sticking with reason alone. Even contemporary debates on politics, homosexuality or abortion are tainted by the faithful applying faith instead of reason.

Faith provides meaning beyond the material. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

More examples

If you were a terrorist recruiter of suicide bombers, responsible for selecting children to indoctrinate religiously so that they will one day blow themselves up, would you rather choose children that you perceive as psychologically strong, or children that you perceive as weak? I think weak children would make for easier prey.

Same goes for adults. When charismatic people start new cults, they usually start recruiting among people which are mentally weakest, people who are in a personal crisis and thus most easily swayed.

Faith provides meaning beyond the material from an external source. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no external meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

More examples

If you were a terrorist recruiter of suicide bombers, responsible for selecting children to indoctrinate religiously so that they will one day blow themselves up, would you rather choose children that you perceive as psychologically strong, or children that you perceive as weak? I think weak children would make for easier prey.

Same goes for adults. When charismatic people start new cults, they usually start recruiting among people which are mentally weakest, people who are in a personal crisis and thus most easily swayed.

Faith provides meaning beyond the material. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

Faith provides meaning beyond the material. Philosophy does not require any source of meaning to exist to explain all scientific observations recorded so far, so far faith is always a superfluous assumption not justified by scientific observations.

To accept that events that occur have no meaning is rationally pure, but psychologically more difficult to most humans than assuming meaning. Assuming any meaning takes the edge of hardship, makes some decision-making easier, reduces certain doubts.

As such, faith serves as a crutch to those who want to reduce the hardship of their existence, by blindly assuming some meaning.

It is thus a symptom of inner strength to accept reality without assuming hidden meanings, and a symptom of inner weakness to rely on some assumed meaning to reduce hardship.

On the other hand, faith does not make people weaker than they are, as a crutch it makes people better at coping with some events in the way mentioned before. As an example it can enable humans to blow up themselves as suicide-bombers, who would not be able to do that without faith. More ethical behaviors exist as well, of course.

However, it is not rationally possible to choose to be faithful to reap those benefits. Faith requires gullibility, the holding of certain assumptions without rational motive.

More examples

If you were a terrorist recruiter of suicide bombers, responsible for selecting children to indoctrinate religiously so that they will one day blow themselves up, would you rather choose children that you perceive as psychologically strong, or children that you perceive as weak? I think weak children would make for easier prey.

Same goes for adults. When charismatic people start new cults, they usually start recruiting among people which are mentally weakest, people who are in a personal crisis and thus most easily swayed.