Got Faith?
I would estimate that 99.9% of human beings have faith. Just so as to clear up any consfusion, here is the definition I am using:
I would argue from this that practically everyone has some faith that they adhere to. I particularly like #2, but the first definition is probably the most common. Note the references to not one, but two of the three major monotheist religions. Faith is obviously an important part of religion, but the two are not as interconnected as they appear to be on the surface. For example, one can be 'religious' but have absolutely no faith in God, but one can have absolute faith in something else and not believe in God at all.
Faith is when theory makes the leap to doctrine. Notable examples here besides religion include economics, enviromentalism, and types of government.
In economics, the two competing systems (until 1991, anyway) were Smith and Marx. Both relied on faith. In the Smith/laissez faire system, there is faith that the market is the most efficient and reliable way to determine human behavior. Call it the Doctrine of the Invisible Hand. In Marx, there are several leaps of faith that spring to my mind almost immediately. First, there is the faith that people will do the right thing by working for the greater good purely because they should. Second, there is the belief that the government, via planning, is the best trustee of the people (this will be explained in more detail). And while I know I am not describing "pure Marx," (there enough socialists on campus to remind me of that on a regular basis), I am describing the Marxist governments that have been seen through history.
In enviromentalism, there is the faith of those who, for whatever reason, choose to believe that mankind is a parasitic organism when it comes to reasources and "Mother Earth." There are several other doctrines in the enviromentalist religion, including sustainable development, global warming, the ozone hole, and the holier-than-thou "we know the truth" characteristic of any strong doctrine of faith.
Types of government go back to Hobbes and Locke. To me, it boils down to how much you trust others to look out for your interests. In more socialist leaning societies, bureaucrats, technocrats, and politicians are the ones repsonsible looking out for the interests of all that are entrusted to them. This has varying degrees of accountability. An absolutist version of this would be Plato's The Republic. In The Republic, the Philisopher-King is ultimately resppnsible for the entire society.
The antithesis of this would be a system in which everyone made sure that their own self-interests were accounted for. The only way this is feasible on a social scale is through direct democracy. Herein lies the problem. What if you don't trust the majority enough to not interfere with your own interests? Elitist representative democracy may be the answer, and you end up with the United States, but only if those elected decide they are looking out for the interests of all, and then decide to rescind their faith in the market to take care of people and use the arm of the government to intervene.
It all comes back to faith. This is why ideologues can never really win an argument against each other. Faith, is by definition "confident," or absolute. Only by shaking the faith of another can the faith you posess spread. Everybody evangelizes, some people have posters or icons, whether they be Jesus, Mao, sea turtles, the American Flag, or even Ché.
- faith (f
th)
n.1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.4. often Faith (Christianity) The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.6. A set of principles or beliefs.
I would argue from this that practically everyone has some faith that they adhere to. I particularly like #2, but the first definition is probably the most common. Note the references to not one, but two of the three major monotheist religions. Faith is obviously an important part of religion, but the two are not as interconnected as they appear to be on the surface. For example, one can be 'religious' but have absolutely no faith in God, but one can have absolute faith in something else and not believe in God at all.
Faith is when theory makes the leap to doctrine. Notable examples here besides religion include economics, enviromentalism, and types of government.
In economics, the two competing systems (until 1991, anyway) were Smith and Marx. Both relied on faith. In the Smith/laissez faire system, there is faith that the market is the most efficient and reliable way to determine human behavior. Call it the Doctrine of the Invisible Hand. In Marx, there are several leaps of faith that spring to my mind almost immediately. First, there is the faith that people will do the right thing by working for the greater good purely because they should. Second, there is the belief that the government, via planning, is the best trustee of the people (this will be explained in more detail). And while I know I am not describing "pure Marx," (there enough socialists on campus to remind me of that on a regular basis), I am describing the Marxist governments that have been seen through history.
In enviromentalism, there is the faith of those who, for whatever reason, choose to believe that mankind is a parasitic organism when it comes to reasources and "Mother Earth." There are several other doctrines in the enviromentalist religion, including sustainable development, global warming, the ozone hole, and the holier-than-thou "we know the truth" characteristic of any strong doctrine of faith.
Types of government go back to Hobbes and Locke. To me, it boils down to how much you trust others to look out for your interests. In more socialist leaning societies, bureaucrats, technocrats, and politicians are the ones repsonsible looking out for the interests of all that are entrusted to them. This has varying degrees of accountability. An absolutist version of this would be Plato's The Republic. In The Republic, the Philisopher-King is ultimately resppnsible for the entire society.
The antithesis of this would be a system in which everyone made sure that their own self-interests were accounted for. The only way this is feasible on a social scale is through direct democracy. Herein lies the problem. What if you don't trust the majority enough to not interfere with your own interests? Elitist representative democracy may be the answer, and you end up with the United States, but only if those elected decide they are looking out for the interests of all, and then decide to rescind their faith in the market to take care of people and use the arm of the government to intervene.
It all comes back to faith. This is why ideologues can never really win an argument against each other. Faith, is by definition "confident," or absolute. Only by shaking the faith of another can the faith you posess spread. Everybody evangelizes, some people have posters or icons, whether they be Jesus, Mao, sea turtles, the American Flag, or even Ché.
| Permalink | 
