Definitions - #301 - #43 - The People's Faith vs. Their Beliefs

#7700 - #14

Everyone has a “Human Belief System”.
“Human Belief Systems” can be quite different!

One “system” believes in an end to things…. an “afterlife”…a heaven… a happy hunting ground, etc.
The other “system” believes there is no end. …(such as: the human mind is incapable of conceiving “infinity”… of parallel lines that never meet ….of “nothing”…of a “vacuum”….of “all” or “every” ….of space (infinite space vs. a sphere of space within a sphere, within a sphere) ….. etc.)

No one is to say that one system is better than another…. That is an individual choice!

One “system” is written down. The interpreters of the words that are written vary as much as the people who profess to know. The mere fact that there is a book (or “a written down”) is sometimes a substitute for authority. The constant repetition of these words is believed by some to be “the authority” itself. If you believe in this authority, you “believe”. There is, for you, an “afterlife”…..(pyramids say so!).... other books say so! If you are brought up to “believe”, you “believe”!

Another system “believes” in science. What you can’t prove or repeat doesn’t necessarily exist now. Such things as an “afterlife”, doesn’t necessarily exist. The human mind is incapable of dealing with such things as “infinity”! Moral values, what everyone wants (ie: liberty, freedom, the right to pursue opportunities, etc.) are not the sole purview of religion (a man made “belief)! From where do they come? Without a “story” to tell us, from where do they come?
If one system demands that another system be adopted or else! Is the system is imperfect?
Isn’t it a fact that more misunderstanding between systems comes from the fact that we do not allow both systems to flourish?

The author has avoided the term “religion”. This word is a reason that people normally begin to take sides and “opinionate”. It is, after all, the way we are brought up! It is the way we have come to “believe”!
One must also come to believe in the “science of ideas”.
Both approach the problems of the “infinite” with two different concepts. Why is one better than another?
Does everything have to be judged “better or worse” than another?

One system, (at least some say), you are an “infidel” if you do not adhere to its written custom and beliefs. This system has a wide following. What do you do with this system if it tries to insist militarily or physically?..... What exactly do you do about this?

Does a system require a code of some sort?
Does the practice of this system cause the disruption?
What exactly do you do about this?