Hearing is Believing?

A short article posted on BeThinking.org: Is Seeing Believing?, relates to my earlier comments on knowledge in some ways.

The "science is knowing" and "seeing is believing" statements demonstrate the same basic attitude that is overly restrictive, and which misrepresents the real nature of human knowledge and belief.

Given that most of the knowlege we gain (and the things we believe) are the result of learning (information that we have accepted on authority) it might be more appropriate to suggest that "hearing is believing" or "reading is believing". The phrase "seeing is believing" might still apply, but only in so far as we saw it on TV!

On the flip side it is interesting to note that faith does not exclude reason or evidence as its basis (despite a common mis-conception that is does). As a result I can say science doesn't exclude faith in God, only scientism (I can recommend following up with the God and Richard Dawkins lecture by Dr John Lennox, I thought it was very good).


Don't try to simplify learning and believing as the simple recording of facts. I know that Australia exists (even though I've never been there) for a multitude of deeply inherent thoughts and experiences. Animals use all their senses to experience and understand the world from pre-birth until they die constantly re-evaluating as they live. 'Seeing is believing' is a rather clich├ęd phrase and, yes, very restrictive if you're only referring to the visible spectrum. As you may agree, there are many more ways of seeing (as a synonym for understanding) over which faith has no purview. Dogma puts a stop to the re-evaluation of life and understanding and is therefore much more restrictive than the maxims you choose to denigrate.

As far as I am concerned, dogma and faith are two very different things. And you also suggest that faith has nothing to do with understanding!??

I suspect that either you missed my point, or you are talking about something different to me when you use the word 'faith'.