Science, belief and faith

“is a believer: is it a man or a naive man of faith?” But there is a huge difference between the act of faith and membership (church or not) beliefs. Beliefs, it is still unproven, and that is why they go crazy, as Nietzsche said: notice that we can believe in “tomorrows,” for example the beliefs that go far beyond the “religious phenomenon” we can believe in race, spiritualism in the country, in Reason, etc. The dogma in general, is everywhere, if we take the word dogma in a very broad sense. Me too, who speak in this moment I am a dogmatic, of course, since the theory of mediation, I think! But unlike the Catholic Church, if I am protesting (you have probably already guessed that I had a Protestant education) I accept discussion, dialogue, debate. But Protestant education is a pure accident of history. Regardless of religious beliefs to which we adhere or not, regardless of religions and churches: they are only the entry in the history of systems more or less sophisticated beliefs: whether you will be born in Delhi, Riyadh or Rome, your beliefs are Hindu, Muslim or Christian, but your faith will be the same… “Finally, that means that “I have faith” or “I lost faith.” If you understand that doubt is always a founder of faith, it can never be acquired. It is always what you do or not like acts of faith. Faith, basically opposed to religion: that is what we usually do not understand. But this does not mean at all that beliefs are shameful. The conflict of faith and beliefs is in fact in all of us. After all, we are men, that is to say animals because they are rational, need certainty. And I will conclude by relating the story as you probably know all. One day Einstein boarded a plane to travel to Canada, a reporter rushed up

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12