Jump to content

Faith and rationality: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Wikified text
m dash style (MOS:DASH)
 
(576 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Two approaches that exist in varying degrees of conflict or compatibility}}
<The following is a portion of [[Larrys Text]], wikification is invited>
{{related|[[Rational fideism]]}}
'''Faith and rationality''' exist in varying degrees of conflict or compatibility. [[Rationality]] is based on [[reason]] or [[facts]]. [[Faith]] is belief in [[Divine inspiration|inspiration]], [[revelation]], or [[authority]]. The word ''faith'' sometimes refers to a belief that is held in spite of or against [[reason]] or [[empirical evidence]], or it can refer to belief based upon a degree of [[evidential]] [[warrant (philosophy)|warrant]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Faith and Reason {{!}} Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/faith-re/ |access-date=2023-02-21 |language=en-US}}</ref>


==Relationship between faith and reason==
Next we will examine the question: "Do we have any good reason to believe that [[God]] exists, or does not exist?" I said before that answers to this question are in the affirmative or the negative, and are or should be supported by arguments, either with the conclusion that God <i>does</i> exist, or with the conclusion that God <i>does not</i> exist. But there is a certain position on this question which does not involve arguments for or against the existence of God, and I want to talk a little bit about it. I mean the view that one should simply have [[faith]], or perhaps that faith is itself, somehow, good reason to believe in God.
Rationalists point out that many people hold irrational beliefs, for many reasons. There may be evolutionary causes for irrational beliefs—irrational beliefs may increase our ability to survive and reproduce.


One more reason for irrational beliefs can perhaps be explained by operant conditioning. For example, in one study by [[B. F. Skinner]] in 1948, [[pigeon]]s were awarded grain at regular time intervals regardless of their behaviour. The result was that each of the pigeons developed their own idiosyncratic response which had become associated with the consequence of receiving grain.<ref name="Skinner">{{cite journal|last=Skinner|first=B. F.|title='Superstition' in the pigeon.|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology|date=1 January 1948|volume=38|issue=2|pages=168–172|doi=10.1037/h0055873|pmid=18913665|s2cid=22577459 }}</ref>
The view that one should simply have faith that God exists is called <i>[[fideism]]</i>. You may be surprised to hear that fideism is indeed studied by philosophers of religion. But what is there to <i>study</i> about faith? We just have it -- we have faith by the grace of God, as fideists would say -- or we don't. So what's to study? Well, two things. First, what <i>is</i> faith? And second, is faith <i>rational</i>?


Believers in the value of faith—for example those who believe salvation is possible through faith alone—frequently suggest that everyone holds beliefs arrived at by faith, not reason.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rosental |first=Creighton J |date=2004-01-01 |title=The reconciliation of faith and reason in Thomas Aquinas |url=https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI3136773 |journal=Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest |pages=1–243}}</ref>
Now a little about the first question, what is faith? Some people are wont to say, "I take the existence of God on faith," or "Faith is my reason for believing." I think these statements are, strictly speaking, incorrect. Now let me explain they seem to imply that religious faith is something <i>different</i> from the belief that God exists. But faith isn't <i>different</i> from believing that God exists: it just <i>is</i> the belief that God exists. Still, if I say I have <i>faith</i> that God exists, I am talking about a particular <i>kind</i> of belief in God, am I not? It is, after all, possible to believe that God exists without having <i>faith</i> that God exists. Right? Suppose I say I have a battery of arguments that <i>prove</i> that God exists, and I support my belief rationally with those arguments; and I absolutely deny that I have <i>faith</i> that God exists. I think that makes sense. So what makes faith that God exists different from other kinds of belief that God exists? What is faith really?


One form of belief held "by faith" may be seen existing in a faith as based on warrant. In this view some degree of evidence provides warrant for faith; it consists in other words in "explain[ing] great things by small."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Hebrews 11 - Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary - Bible Commentaries |url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/pmc/hebrews-11.html |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=StudyLight.org |language=en}}</ref>
In order to answer that question I think there's another interesting question to ask. Is it something about the <i>belief itself</i> that makes faith different, or is it something about the <i>relation</i> of that belief to other things one believes? Is it, for example, the <i>strength</i> of the belief in God that makes faith different, or is it how that belief is related to other things one believes, that makes the belief not just any belief, but <i>faith</i>? If you think a little about it, I think you can see that it <i>isn't</i> anything about the belief considered by itself that makes the belief faith. It is, rather, the fact that the belief is accepted <i>without any reasons</i>. In other words, what makes a kind of religious belief not just belief, but <i>faith</i>, is the fact that the belief is not supported by arguments, or reasons, or evidence. Or most generally: there are no <i>other</i> beliefs that one has, which one thinks makes one's belief that God exists <i>more probably true</i>.


== Christianity ==
So here then is the claim: If I have <i>faith</i> that God exists, then I believe that God exists, but I do not claim to have any other beliefs which make it more probably true that God exists. Faith is belief without reasons. Hence, fideism may be stated as the view that one ought to believe that God exists, but one should not base that belief on any other beliefs; one should, instead, accept it without any reasons at all. At least <i>initially</i>. There are some kinds of moderate fideism which say that one should have faith to begin with, and only then, when one's faith is strong enough, go out in search of reasons to believe.
{{Further|Faith in Christianity|Credo ut intelligam|Fides quaerens intellectum}}


=== {{Anchor|Views of the Roman Catholic Church}}Catholic views ===
Now to the second question I wanted to ask about faith, namely, can faith be rational? I think this depends on what you mean by the word "rational." If, in order for a belief to be rational, I <i>must</i> have reasons for the belief, then faith is, by definition, not rational. And in that sense, fideism specifically recommends that one <i>not</i> be rational. The question, then, is whether this is a very good notion about rationality.
[[Thomas Aquinas]] was the first to write a full treatment of the relationship, differences, and similarities between faith, which he calls "an intellectual assent",<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm "Faith"] from the ''[[Catholic Encyclopedia]]''</ref> and reason.<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12673b.htm "Reason"] from the ''[[Catholic Encyclopedia]]''</ref>


''[[Dei Filius]]'' was a [[dogmatic constitution]] of the [[First Vatican Council]] on the [[Roman Catholic]] faith. It was adopted unanimously on 24 April 1870. It states that "not only can faith and reason never be opposed to one another, but they are of mutual aid one to the other".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds2.v.ii.i.html#v.ii.i-p21.5|title=Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical notes. Volume II. The History of Creeds.|work=ccel.org}}</ref>
Let me give you an example of a belief which is rational but for which you have no reasons. Suppose you are suffering from an insistent and painful headache, and you tell me, "Geez I've got a splitting headache." I say, "What are your reasons for believing that?" You tell me, "Well, I just <i>feel</i> it." So I demand to know what reasons you have for thinking that you feel the headache. And so naturally you reply, "<i>Reasons</i> for thinking I <i>feel</i> the headache? That's ridiculous! I have no reasons. I just feel the pain!" Then suppose I accuse you of being irrational. I say, "You are believing something without reasons. That's irrational." Do you think I would be correct?


Recent [[pope]]s have spoken about faith and rationality: ''[[Fides et ratio]]'', an [[encyclical letter]] promulgated by [[Pope John Paul II]] on 14 September 1998, deals with the relationship between faith and reason. [[Pope Benedict XVI]]'s [[Regensburg lecture]], delivered on 12 September 2006, was on the subject of "faith, reason and the university".<ref>Benedict XVI, [https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg.html Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections], ''Holy See'' website, accessed 31 January 2024</ref>
Surely not. Surely you can believe, without reasons, that you feel a headache, and be entirely rational in this belief. In fact I would say you'd be nuts if you <i>didn't</i> have the belief -- if, somehow, you felt a powerful headache and yet were somehow able to convince yourself that you weren't feeling a headache. That would, I think, be irrational. So here's my point: It is <i>possible</i>, in at least <i>some</i> cases (surely not in <i>all</i> cases), to be rational in holding a belief even though one has no reasons for the belief. I think that <i>very many</i> beliefs require reasons in order to be rational. But there are <i>some</i> beliefs which do <i>not</i> require reasons in order to be rational.


=== Lutheran views ===
So is religious faith rational? That depends on whether, indeed, reasons to believe in God <i>are</i> required for <i>that</i> belief to be rational. Now, some recent philosophers, most prominently the American William Alston, have argued that belief in God <i>is</i> a "basic belief" -- in other words, faith can be rational even though it is not supported by reasons. How can Alston say that? Well, he says that some people have certain religious experiences, in which they can, as it were, perceive that God exists, or they can feel God's presence. And just like belief that you feel the pain, you don't need reasons to believe that you are experiencing God's existence when you feel his presence. So Alston is, I think, fairly called a moderate mystic, in the sense I defined earlier. Here's the idea. Suppose you think you can come into some sort of immediate contact with God -- you think you feel God's presence. Then the idea is that you don't have to have <i>reasons</i> to believe that you feel God's presence. The belief, that you do indeed feel God's presence, is nevertheless rational. You have what might be called "rational faith." That, at least roughly put, is Alston's sort of view.
{{Empty section|date=November 2022}}


=== Reformed views ===
Now needless to say, if you don't believe you have such experiences, or if you think that these experiences are just a kind of vivid imagination, then you won't be at all impressed by Alston's view. And then you will maintain that, if belief in God is to be rational, it <i>must</i> be supported by reasons. In other words, if you disagree with Alston, you will maintain that the belief in God is in that large class of beliefs which <i>do</i> require reasons in order to be rational. That doesn't mean that you will necessarily be an [[agnostic]] or an [[atheist]]. You could still be a [[theism|theist]]. You'd simply maintain that you <i>do</i> have evidence supporting your theism, you <i>do</i> have reasons to believe that God exists.
{{See also|Reformed epistemology}}
[[Alvin Plantinga]] upholds that faith may be the result of evidence testifying to the reliability of the source of truth claims, but although it may involve this, he sees faith as being the result of hearing the truth of the gospel with the internal persuasion by the Holy Spirit moving and enabling him to believe. "Christian belief is produced in the believer by the internal instigation of the [[Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]], endorsing the teachings of [[Bible|Scripture]], which is itself divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. The result of the work of the Holy Spirit is faith."<ref>{{cite book|last=Plantinga|first=Alvin|title=Warranted Christian Belief|url=https://archive.org/details/warrantedchristi0000plan|url-access=registration|year=2000|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=USA|isbn=0195131924|pages=[https://archive.org/details/warrantedchristi0000plan/page/250 250], 291}}</ref>


=== Evangelical views ===
So what if you think about all this long and hard, and you come to a conclusion. You say to yourself, "Alston is wrong; we can't <i>simply</i> say, without any reasons, we can feel the presence of God in nature and in our lives, and then expect to be <i>rational</i> in our belief in God. Belief in God has to be backed up by arguments in order to be rational. Faith, blind faith, is irrational; and so fideism recommends irrationality. I'll accept all that. But see here, I don't care about rationality. Or rather, I want to be rational when it comes to my career, my family, and so forth; but when it comes to religious life, rationality is <i>not a virtue</i>. So, even if faith is irrational, that doesn't matter. In fact, it might be a virtue to believe in God irrationally! My very irrationality would show my devotion to God!"
American biblical scholar [[Archibald Thomas Robertson]] stated that the Greek word ''pistis'' used for faith in the New Testament (over two hundred forty times), and rendered "assurance" in Acts 17:31 (KJV), is "an old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence."<ref>{{cite book|last=Robertson|first=Archibald Thomas|title=WORD PICTURES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT|pages=Chapter 17|url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/robertson_at/wp_acts.xviii.html}}</ref> Likewise Tom Price (Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics) affirms that when the New Testament talks about faith positively it only uses words derived from the Greek root [pistis] which means "to be persuaded."<ref>{{cite web|last=Price|first=Thomas|title=Faith is about 'just trusting' God isn't It?|date=9 November 2007|url=http://www.bethinking.org/bible-jesus/introductory/faith-is-about-just-trusting-god-isnt-it.htm|access-date=23 January 2014}}</ref>


In contrast to faith meaning blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence, [[Alister McGrath]] quotes Oxford Anglican theologian W. H. Griffith-Thomas (1861–1924), who states faith is "not blind, but intelligent" and "commences with the conviction of the mind based on adequate evidence", which McGrath sees as "a good and reliable definition, synthesizing the core elements of the characteristic Christian understanding of faith."<ref>{{cite book|last=McGrath|first=Alister E.|title=The Order of Things: Explorations in Scientific Theology|year=2008|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=978-1405125567|page=33|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WrRZBOxJzDcC}}</ref>
There are people, including probably some people in this class, who think this way. I won't discuss this attitude, except to make one remark. Namely, that it is not at all clear to me that it is possible to compartmentalize your life, so that you say that irrationality is all right in religious matters, but not in more ordinary matters. I simply fear that if you permit yourself to be irrational in religious matters, you will also, under excitement or duress, permit yourself to be irrational in non-religious matters.


==Jewish views==
So suppose you then take an even <i>more</i> extreme view, and say, "Who cares? I never thought rationality was important at all." That is a view that I won't dignify: I don't think that <i>anyone</i> holds that view <i>really</i>. <i>Everyone</i> cares about the rationality of <i>some</i> of their beliefs, I don't care who you are or how strongly you deny it. If you do deny it, I will tell you that you aren't thinking hard enough about who you are and what your actual attitudes are, or how you live your everyday life. So don't go around saying that you don't care about irrationality <i>at</i> <i>all</i>, because you most certainly do. What I think <i>is</i> possible, though, as I said, is that you think that irrationality in <i>some</i> areas of your life, for example when it comes to religion and love and weekend activities, is OK. And I am simply raising the question as to whether you will be able, <i>successfully</i>, to compartmentalize your attitudes this way. Maybe you can. Some people <i>seem</i> to be able to, anyway.
The 14th-century [[Jewish philosopher]] [[Levi ben Gerson]] tried to reconcile faith and reason. He wrote: "the [[Torah|Law]] cannot prevent us from considering to be true that which our reason urges us to believe."<ref>{{Citation |last=Rudavsky |first=Tamar |title=Gersonides |date=2020 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/gersonides/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |edition=Winter 2020 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=2022-11-18}}</ref>


== Islamic view ==
This is all just food for thought for you; as always you have the right to think whatever you like. All right, that's all I'm going to say about the rationality of faith. Next what I am going to talk about are some positive reasons to believe that God exists -- in other words, <i>arguments</i> which have as their conclusion the claim, "God exists."
{{Empty section|date=November 2022}}

==See also==
{{Columns-list|colwidth=22em|
* [[Christian apologetics]]
** [[Evidential apologetics]]
** [[Christian existential apologetics|Existential apologetics]]
** [[Presuppositional apologetics]]
* [[Dehellenization of Christianity]]
* [[Divine illumination]]
* [[Enlightenment in Buddhism]]
* [[Essence–energies distinction]]
* ''[[Faith and Philosophy]]''
* [[Fideism]]
* [[Methods of obtaining knowledge]]
* [[Natural theology]]
* [[Non-overlapping magisteria]]
* [[Panrationalism]]
* [[Philosophy of religion]]
* [[Relationship between religion and science]]
* [[Religious epistemology]]
* [[Religious experience]]
* [[Theistic rationalism]]
* [[Theory of everything (philosophy)|Theory of everything]]
* [[Theory of justification]]
}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
*{{Cite web |last=Becker |first=Siegbert W. |date=1957 |title=Faith and Reason in Martin Luther |url=http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerFaith.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407083833/http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerFaith.pdf |archive-date=2014-04-07 |access-date=2014-04-06 |website=Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library online essay file}}
*{{cite journal |first=Bruce D. |last=Marshall |author-link=Bruce D. Marshall |year=1999 |title=Faith and Reason Reconsidered: Aquinas and Luther on Deciding What is True |url=http://www.thomist.org/journal/1999/991aMars.htm |url-status=dead |journal=The Thomist |volume=63 |pages=1–48 |doi=10.1353/tho.1999.0041 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030904123507/http://www.thomist.org/journal/1999/991aMars.htm |archive-date=2003-09-04 |access-date=2011-05-11 |s2cid=171157642}}

{{Epistemology}}
{{Philosophy of religion}}
{{Philosophy of science}}
{{Philosophy topics}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Faith And Rationality}}
[[Category:Epistemology of religion]]
[[Category:Philosophy and atheism]]
[[Category:Religion and atheism]]
[[Category:Religion and science]]
[[Category:Religious belief and doctrine]]
[[Category:Philosophy of religion]]
[[Category:Faith]]

Latest revision as of 19:05, 5 July 2024

See also: Rational fideism

Faith and rationality exist in varying degrees of conflict or compatibility. Rationality is based on reason or facts. Faith is belief in inspiration, revelation, or authority. The word faith sometimes refers to a belief that is held in spite of or against reason or empirical evidence, or it can refer to belief based upon a degree of evidential warrant.[1]

Relationship between faith and reason

[edit]

Rationalists point out that many people hold irrational beliefs, for many reasons. There may be evolutionary causes for irrational beliefs—irrational beliefs may increase our ability to survive and reproduce.

One more reason for irrational beliefs can perhaps be explained by operant conditioning. For example, in one study by B. F. Skinner in 1948, pigeons were awarded grain at regular time intervals regardless of their behaviour. The result was that each of the pigeons developed their own idiosyncratic response which had become associated with the consequence of receiving grain.[2]

Believers in the value of faith—for example those who believe salvation is possible through faith alone—frequently suggest that everyone holds beliefs arrived at by faith, not reason.[3]

One form of belief held "by faith" may be seen existing in a faith as based on warrant. In this view some degree of evidence provides warrant for faith; it consists in other words in "explain[ing] great things by small."[4]

Christianity

[edit]
Further information: Faith in Christianity, Credo ut intelligam, and Fides quaerens intellectum

Catholic views

[edit]

Thomas Aquinas was the first to write a full treatment of the relationship, differences, and similarities between faith, which he calls "an intellectual assent",[5] and reason.[6]

Dei Filius was a dogmatic constitution of the First Vatican Council on the Roman Catholic faith. It was adopted unanimously on 24 April 1870. It states that "not only can faith and reason never be opposed to one another, but they are of mutual aid one to the other".[7]

Recent popes have spoken about faith and rationality: Fides et ratio, an encyclical letter promulgated by Pope John Paul II on 14 September 1998, deals with the relationship between faith and reason. Pope Benedict XVI's Regensburg lecture, delivered on 12 September 2006, was on the subject of "faith, reason and the university".[8]

Lutheran views

[edit]

Reformed views

[edit]
See also: Reformed epistemology

Alvin Plantinga upholds that faith may be the result of evidence testifying to the reliability of the source of truth claims, but although it may involve this, he sees faith as being the result of hearing the truth of the gospel with the internal persuasion by the Holy Spirit moving and enabling him to believe. "Christian belief is produced in the believer by the internal instigation of the Holy Spirit, endorsing the teachings of Scripture, which is itself divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. The result of the work of the Holy Spirit is faith."[9]

Evangelical views

[edit]

American biblical scholar Archibald Thomas Robertson stated that the Greek word pistis used for faith in the New Testament (over two hundred forty times), and rendered "assurance" in Acts 17:31 (KJV), is "an old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence."[10] Likewise Tom Price (Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics) affirms that when the New Testament talks about faith positively it only uses words derived from the Greek root [pistis] which means "to be persuaded."[11]

In contrast to faith meaning blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence, Alister McGrath quotes Oxford Anglican theologian W. H. Griffith-Thomas (1861–1924), who states faith is "not blind, but intelligent" and "commences with the conviction of the mind based on adequate evidence", which McGrath sees as "a good and reliable definition, synthesizing the core elements of the characteristic Christian understanding of faith."[12]

Jewish views

[edit]

The 14th-century Jewish philosopher Levi ben Gerson tried to reconcile faith and reason. He wrote: "the Law cannot prevent us from considering to be true that which our reason urges us to believe."[13]

Islamic view

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Faith and Reason | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy". Retrieved 2023-02-21.
  2. ^ Skinner, B. F. (1 January 1948). "'Superstition' in the pigeon". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 38 (2): 168–172. doi:10.1037/h0055873. PMID 18913665. S2CID 22577459.
  3. ^ Rosental, Creighton J (2004-01-01). "The reconciliation of faith and reason in Thomas Aquinas". Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest: 1–243.
  4. ^ "Hebrews 11 - Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary - Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  5. ^ "Faith" from the Catholic Encyclopedia
  6. ^ "Reason" from the Catholic Encyclopedia
  7. ^ "Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical notes. Volume II. The History of Creeds". ccel.org.
  8. ^ Benedict XVI, Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections, Holy See website, accessed 31 January 2024
  9. ^ Plantinga, Alvin (2000). Warranted Christian Belief. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 250, 291. ISBN 0195131924.
  10. ^ Robertson, Archibald Thomas. WORD PICTURES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. pp. Chapter 17.
  11. ^ Price, Thomas (9 November 2007). "Faith is about 'just trusting' God isn't It?". Retrieved 23 January 2014.
  12. ^ McGrath, Alister E. (2008). The Order of Things: Explorations in Scientific Theology. John Wiley & Sons. p. 33. ISBN 978-1405125567.
  13. ^ Rudavsky, Tamar (2020), "Gersonides", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2022-11-18

Further reading

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Faith_and_rationality&oldid=1232816109"