Faith and rationality: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:05, 5 July 2024

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

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

Catholic views

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

Reformed views

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

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

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

References

^ "Faith and Reason | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy". Retrieved 2023-02-21.
^ 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.
^ Rosental, Creighton J (2004-01-01). "The reconciliation of faith and reason in Thomas Aquinas". Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest: 1–243.
^ "Hebrews 11 - Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary - Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
^ "Faith" from the Catholic Encyclopedia
^ "Reason" from the Catholic Encyclopedia
^ "Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical notes. Volume II. The History of Creeds". ccel.org.
^ Benedict XVI, Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections, Holy See website, accessed 31 January 2024
^ Plantinga, Alvin (2000). Warranted Christian Belief. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 250, 291. ISBN 0195131924.
^ Robertson, Archibald Thomas. WORD PICTURES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. pp. Chapter 17.
^ Price, Thomas (9 November 2007). "Faith is about 'just trusting' God isn't It?". Retrieved 23 January 2014.
^ McGrath, Alister E. (2008). The Order of Things: Explorations in Scientific Theology. John Wiley & Sons. p. 33. ISBN 978-1405125567.
^ 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

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Short description|Two approaches that exist in varying degrees of conflict or compatibility}}
-''The following is a portion of [[Larry's Text]], which consists of lectures given by Wikipedia co-founder [[Larry Sanger]] in courses that he taught at [[Ohio State University]].  Wikification and NPOVing are 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==
-A couple of objections have been added and irrelevant verbiage deleted.  "[[Faith]]" is a separate page.
+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>
-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.
+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>
-It is <i>possible</i>, in at least <i>some</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.
+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>
-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 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.
+== Christianity ==
-If you think you feel God's presence, then you already believe in God.  You may not have realized it, but you do.  One does not feel the presence of something one knows not to exist.  The rational reasons for believing in God without evidence of Its existence are economic and social advantage.  Most people either accept what mommy and daddy told them or switch to a religion that offers a better deal.
+{{Further|Faith in Christianity|Credo ut intelligam|Fides quaerens intellectum}}
+=== {{Anchor|Views of the Roman Catholic Church}}Catholic 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 or reasons to believe that God exists.
+[[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>
-So what if you think about all this, and come to a conclusion, saying, "Alston is wrong; we can't <i>simply</i> say, without any reasons, that 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. Blind faith, is irrational; and so fideism recommends irrationality.  But 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!"
+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>
-It is not at all clear 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.  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.
+=== Lutheran views ===
+{{Empty section|date=November 2022}}
+=== Reformed views ===
+{{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 ===
+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>
+==Jewish views==
+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 ==
+{{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]]

v t e Epistemology
Epistemologists	Thomas Aquinas Augustine of HippoлЬцУ William Alston Robert Audi A. J. Ayer George Berkeley Laurence BonJour Gilles Deleuze Keith DeRose René Descartes John Dewey Fred Dretske Edmund Gettier Alvin Goldman Nelson Goodman Paul Grice Anil Gupta Susan Haack David Hume Immanuel Kant Søren Kierkegaard Peter Klein Saul Kripke Hilary Kornblith David Lewis John Locke G. E. Moore John McDowell Robert Nozick Alvin Plantinga Plato Duncan Pritchard James Pryor Hilary Putnam W. V. O. Quine Thomas Reid Bertrand Russell Gilbert Ryle Wilfrid Sellars Susanna Siegel Ernest Sosa P. F. Strawson Baruch Spinoza Timothy Williamson Ludwig Wittgenstein Nicholas Wolterstorff Vienna Circle more...
Theories	Coherentism Constructivism Contextualism Empiricism Evolutionary epistemology Fallibilism Feminist epistemology Fideism Foundationalism Holism Infinitism Innatism Naïve realism Naturalized epistemology Phenomenalism Positivism Rationalism Reductionism Reliabilism Representational realism Skepticism Transcendental idealism
Concepts	A priori knowledge A posteriori knowledge Analysis Analytic–synthetic distinction Belief Common sense Descriptive knowledge Exploratory thought Epistemic injustice Epistemic virtue Gettier problem Induction Internalism and externalism Justification Knowledge Objectivity Privileged access Problem of induction Problem of other minds Perception Procedural knowledge Proposition Regress argument Simplicity Truth more...
Related articles	Outline of epistemology Faith and rationality Formal epistemology Metaepistemology Philosophy of perception Philosophy of science Social epistemology Virtue epistemology
Category Task Force Stubs Discussion