We have some special ideas in our minds, because we often talk about them, describe them, and even place a lot of expectations on them, and over time, we think that they really exist in the real world. But alas, none of us have ever actually seen them; or even if someone had seen them, he could not be sure whether what he saw was his real body; or neither the people who had seen them nor those who had not seen them could persuade the other to reach accepted conclusions.
These special ideas, I will temporarily find the closest word to describe, called "faith."
Belief, unlike faith, has not yet reached the systematic and theoretical nature of the latter. Because it is systematic and theoretical, the "faith" of faith carries a strong level of consciousness at the rational level—he voluntarily devotes himself to this value system, willing to entrust his interpretation and arrangement of fate to this system. Beliefs are far from such a point, they are just scattered ideas, and even if there is a conflict between these ideas, they do not hinder our belief.
Beliefs, of course, are also different from truths, and since they have not been examined rationally and verified empirically, our minds remain only at the stage of spontaneous, unrecognizable approval of them. Neither think they are wrong nor right— "they are right or wrong" has not yet become a problem in our minds, they are the fish of rational censorship in our brains.
The above describes so much, you may still feel in the clouds, I can give some examples, you may understand what I mean better:
Take love, for example.
We often argue about whether it is "love at first sight" or "love for a long time", and we will repeatedly think about "does he/she love me or not?" But few people on a rational level question whether the concept of "love" really means something. (Note that I am talking about serious discussion on the rational level, and the accusations and late-night complaints after drinking do not count))
Is there really love in this world? I mean, does this particular relationship really fit the setting and description we impose on it? For example, exclusivity (i.e., fidelity), such as uniqueness (only one in a lifetime can love)? When admiration happens, how do you determine that this is love and not simply a heart of color? How do you determine that the feelings between the two of you are fundamentally different from your feelings with other people?
Ask yourself, when we make this judgment, we do not rely on analytical reason, but on a very hazy intuitive feeling. This feeling tells us: "Something special happened between me and him/her, and although I don't know what love is, I can still be sure that this is love".
This unreasonable idea is faith—a lack of complete, definitive knowledge of it, but it does not prevent us from recognizing and adhering to it.
Until now, we can't even accept the possibility that love doesn't exist (fortunately, this is unprofitable!). Otherwise, what if it really turns out to be false! If love does not exist, then marriage is only a social institution that assumes the function of procreation; if love does not exist, then there is only naked lust and starvation between men and women.
Another example is truth.
Yes, I just said that faith is different from truth, but what I am referring to above is truth as concrete content. The very concept of truth is an uncompromising belief.
We can obtain Newton's three principles, and we can also understand two theories of relativity. But we never know if they describe the ultimate truth of the world. We can even build disciplinary edifices in every science, but we're not sure that the next series of discoveries will completely negate this established paradigm — after all, the history of science has witnessed so many dramatic subversions and revolutions. We always believe that what we believe in the present is the truth, but we will always be punched in the face at some point in the future, and from this point of view, human beings can only be infinitely close to the truth, and cannot truly reach the truth.
It may seem embarrassing to realize this: on the one hand, the many principles we are clinging to at the moment must be problematic, but we have to treat them and use them as truths; on the other hand, knowing that truth is impossible to attain, we must continue to search for it as relentlessly as we can.
What sustains us in the face of harsh reality and pitiful cognition?
It can only be faith. Even though it is quite possible that humanity will not see pure, complete truth throughout its history, we are still willing to believe that it exists objectively (it is just that we cannot attain it ourselves, but this does not mean that truth does not exist). Since truth exists, even if it is always out of our reach, it is enough to give us hope), although since it cannot be attained, its objective existence means little to us. Even we are willing to ignore the history of science, which is full of failures, and believe that one day humanity can reach the full, ultimate truth. This belief, of course, has no cause, cannot be supported by all historical experience and rational analysis, and we believe it only because we are willing to believe it. Only in this way can we have the courage and motivation to continue to explore, only success is possible, and efforts will be meaningful.
Isn't that what belief is?
Another example is justice.
What I mean by "justice" is broad, and society is able to reciprocate legitimate, moderate feedback for the actions of individuals, and that is justice.
For example, we are all willing to believe that "to live a better life, you must work hard", because you believe that society can provide an appropriate reward for your efforts, which we call "one point of hard work, one point of harvest". Only by believing this will we be willing to give and dare to expect the future after giving. This is called justice.
Another example is that we are willing to help others, and even willing to suffer a small loss, because we believe that "suffering a loss is a blessing" and believe that "when I treat the world with kindness, the world will also repay me with kindness." Once we believe in this, the real world becomes safe – and it is possible for us to make our surroundings friendly and harmonious through our own efforts. This is also justice.
In short, the significance of justice lies in the fact that it maintains the inevitable causal link between individual agency and the real world. It makes the latter understandable and worth looking forward to, and it is the most basic prerequisite for us and the world to negotiate and interact.
But calm down and think about it, and you'll see that justice is not a promise that must be fulfilled – why should it be honored to you? Who will guarantee its delivery?
Social feedback is a kind of procedure, as long as it is a procedure, there will inevitably be loopholes, and no political or economic system can guarantee fairness and justice 100%. The distribution of social resources such as education, medical care, and old-age care is always unfair, and classes, hierarchies, and privileges have always existed. Human beings have been in institutional civilization for at least 10,000 years, but they have never achieved fairness and justice at the level of social systems. According to some people, the future may be realized, but history is so, we have enough right to remain pessimistic.
Taking a step back, even if the system can provide you with a fair chance, you can change your destiny through your own efforts. Some unforeseen accidents can still befall you. "Why should I suffer from this incurable disease?" "Why did I happen to be sitting in that accident car?" ”。 In the face of these accidents, so-called justice has become a very ironic and wishful pedantic setting.
The more you look at the micro level, the more childish and ridiculous justice becomes. But when your eyes move to the macro historical level, justice becomes so abstract and unfinished.
We have never seen perfect justice, and the signs of historical development do not indicate that justice will come in the future, but we still insist on believing in it.
I think that the reason why we are willing to believe in justice is only because there are many things that are personal but not completely within our own control, so we have to entrust this part to the real world, which is expressed as the recognition and expectation of justice.
Truth, justice, and love represent human beings' highest belief in truth, goodness, and beauty.
According to common sense, in order to make a modern rational man believe in something, he should first of course convince him that it really exists, that is, its existence must be possible at the level of logic and reality, because matter determines consciousness. For example, if you want a modern person to admit the existence of an extragalactic galaxy, you have to show him or give him ample evidence, and once it is confirmed, his acknowledgment of the galaxy becomes unshakable—believing in rational confirmation.
But belief is the opposite, and it is our conviction in it that gives it authenticity—of course, the "authenticity" referred to here is not authenticity in the existential sense. Rather, it is an idea, although it has no real object, but it has a social effect that is not inferior to other things.
It is precisely because of the belief in truth, goodness, and beauty that we can set aside the slim future and resolutely take the steps of the present. For human beings, future possibilities are created, not predicted and deduced. Our predictions and perceptions of the future do not affect the activities we have at hand today.
We live not only in cold rationality, but also in fiery anticipation, and in this respect human beings are great.