Actions are more important than beliefs
By
Jay
on March 07, 2007
All of these claims focus around belief which is mainly irrelevant. It is better to do good things than to believe good things (or believe in a good thing).
It's quite possible to live an extremely religious life (ie, doing good things) in order to partake of community while still not believing in God. From the outside, no one would know.
Agreed
53
11
82.8% 17.2%
Embed Claim
Make a related claim
Claims inspired by this one
- 3-49 Actions without belief are useless.
- 1-10 The deference to action at the expense of attention to belief is a reflection of the excessive materialism of the modern industrial world.
Similar claims
- 3-49 Actions without belief are useless.
- 12-10 If one's belief in an invisible pink unicorn leads to actions that make the world unambiguously worse, it is a non-worthwhile belief, even if there is an invisible pink unicorn.
- 126-173 I believe there is a God.
- 9-66 I believe there is more than one god.
- 22-64 I believe I am God.
Discussion (14)
Belief drives action. Action is more important to our immediate reality, but belief, being the cause behind some of the actions, must not be dismissed as irrilevant.
"Mainly irrelevant". You might be doing 'good' things because you believe in God. You might be doing 'good' things because you want everyone to think that you're a good person. You might be doing 'good' things because you think it will get you laid.
The belief that is causing your actions is -- for the most part -- not particularly relevant. What is important is that you're doing 'good' things.
Actions without faith are useless, therefore actions can't be more important than belief. http://jyte.com/cl/actions-without-belief-are-useless
Jay, how does one determine what is most important? Causality seems critical to me.
Most people would probably say they want to do good things. But then what determines what "good" is?
In a sentient being, only subcortical reflexes are not preceded by thought. Belief is forethought about the consequences of actions. It precedes and directs the morality (good or bad) of all action. Therefore, it is more important.
Knappster, go up to my previous comment, I believe I cover most of your points there.
"The belief that is causing your actions is -- for the most part -- not particularly relevant."
"You might be doing 'good' things because you believe in God."
"You might be doing 'good' things because you want everyone to think that you're a good person."
"You might be doing 'good' things because you think it will get you laid."
Please note the scarce quotes which indicate that the word good is intended to be taken as imprecisely defined and subject to the interpretation of any individual.
You also might pay particular attention to the bold item at the top of this comment. I don't deny that belief causes action; my premise is that the nature of your belief is "mainly irrelevant".
If I kill you because I believe the giant monkey that lives in my wallet wants you dead, you're just as dead as if I believe that you're trying to kill me.
What you create in this world of meat and stone matters more than why you create.
DAMN! Cursed unclosed tag!
Jay, I don't think you can credibly dismiss causality as irrelevant. Why is more important that what. The source of meaning is spirit, not material.
Knappster, sure I can. See, watch: "I'm dismissing causality as mostly irrelevant. Results matter more than intent."
As I wrote, you cannot credibly dismiss causality as "mostly irrelevant."
If results were more important than intent, how would you consider love in such a worldview?
Oh no, knappster, perhaps you cannot not believe that I can credibly dismiss causality as "mostly irrelecant". I believe that I can.
So there. Nyah-nyah.
Depends how you define belief.
I am a Christian, therefore I disagree.
But aside from that, consider the poor man who steals a loaf of bread to feed his family.
His actions are corrupt, but his beliefs and intent are honest.
The term to define here is "important".
RProgammer, I completely disagree.
His intent is to steal something.
Either the theft is justified by the fact that his family is starving or it is not. If it is, then his action is justified. If it is not, then his action is not.
If he believes that the invisible pink unicorn told him to steal the bread to feed his family, it really doesn't matter.