Comments due by 11:59pm this Sunday (9/8).
In
class we are moving to consider the relationship between faith and reason.Certainly we hear
quite a lot about faith and the importance (or danger) of faith. We hear
from some that faith and reason are at odds, that faith is best
conceived of as something like belief in the absence of, or even opposed
to, the evidence. Others seem to think that faith can be quite
reasonable or rational, and they then offer us reasons for thinking that
the content of their faith is true.
How are we to think about such things?
To help us toward that end, let's consider three brief interviews on the topic of faith and reason. First, here's an interview with Alister McGrath (Professor of Theology at King's College, London).
Second, here's an interview with Ed Wierenga (Professor of Philosophy and of Religion at the University of Rochester).
Third, and finally, here's an interview with J.L. Schellenberg (Professor of Philosophy at Mount Saint Vincent University).
There's
certainly a lot to think about here in all of these interviews. Which
claims struck you in each video? Which arguments did you find
compelling? What objections might you have to some of the positions
advanced? Were there some common themes found in each video? If so, what
are those themes? After watching these videos, has your view of the
relationship between faith and reason changed any? How so? How do you now think about faith and reason (even if your view did not change upon watching the videos)?
Push
each other. Challenge each other. Demand reasons and arguments. Offer
arguments. Raise objections. Ask questions. Learn from each other. And,
as always, do so in a way that is gracious, charitable, and humble.
The claim from the first video that really stuck out was Kuhn saying it takes two leaps of faith to believe in God. With the first step being a leap to belief and the second being a leap to trust.
ReplyDeleteThe next video was about how to have faith. I thought that the way Wierenga explained faith was good because he said that there isn't a way to just "hand" faith to someone because its just something that happens and someone. Kuhn replied with having to have science prove everything and things that don't have proof don't seem like they can be complete. The objection that Wierenga came back with was very good because he said that you cant prove that your wife loves you through science and you don't have to hire private investigators to follow her around to prove that she loves you. It is your trust and faith that proves it to yourself.
In the third video I felt that Schellenbergs description of faith kind of contradicted the hole meaning of faith. I understand what he meant by saying that you can have faith that you want to believe, but you don't exactly need to believe to have faith. His example about "say a kid is in the hospital and the doctor says he isnt going to live to want to have faith that he is going to but you don't necessarily believe he is going to" But even though this is some what true I still think that you have to have belief before you can have faith. So I do not like Schellenbergs view on this because he basically said that Kuhn can have faith in God even though he doesnt for sure know if he believes it. That doesnt seem like a way it should be approached.
After watching these videos I am still confused on the view of the relationship between faith and reason so I can not say that the videos changed my view any.
By Elliott Westerbeck
After watching all 3 of these videos in order, I think what I really took away from these is a new perspective on exactly what faith is. Primarily that faith doesn't inherently require belief. Schellenberg says that having an imaginative response to the world can grant faith but not true belief. Human beings have amazing imaginations. The example he gave was the use of faith that his sick son would get better, even if he doesn't truly believe it is possible, this imagination gives him the ability to make it through this tough time.
ReplyDeleteThe ability to imagine the world in a way that it actually isn't, is faith. This is sort of ground breaking in the way we can think about faith. Faith and "belief in things not seen" tend to be synonymous in our culture. The idea that there is a separation between the two reminds me of when I had an imaginary friend. I was well aware that no such friend existed, but my imagination allowed me act as if he was real. I talked to him, and I acted as if he was going to respond.
Although I am not calling God simply an imaginary friend, I do think it is a very good way to rationalize the idea of God. This sort of faith makes God less threatening and easier to respond to.
I personally liked the first two videos better than the third. My favorite would be the second video. He talks about having faith that your wife loves you even though you don't necessarily have proof. He said that you don't hire private investigators to go around looking for reasons not to have faith that your wife loves you. I love this because it shows that we can use the Bible to put faith and reason together. We don't need to be upset because we can't see God at work around us today. He is there. The proof is in the book. As for the first video I can see where he is coming from with the two leaps of belief and trust. In the third video I can understand wanting to believe and being open to faith. I used to be like that. However, I don't think doubts are a bad thing. Doubts lead to asking questions and digging deeper in your faith. Overall, I liked the videos and thought what they had to say was interesting.
ReplyDeleteby Miranda Cornwell
I suppose at times, "faith" and "believes" are interchangeable. Alister Mcgrath mentions in his interview that "you already believe many things, but you can't prove all of them." I think it's great that some hold such faith in what they believe, though i'm not one of them. It might sound cynical but, I'm not gonna believe in anything unless I have a reason to, or that it more or less make sense to me, its gotta be plausible.
ReplyDeleteIn the first interview the interviewer addressed a concern that many experience, that "blindly believing in something" might make us feel foolish, I agree, Im all for "not imprisoned by reason" however, take the example from the second interview with Edward Wierenga; he suggest that there is no need to doubt that one's wife loves him/her, there's no need for a private investigator; if that's the case? Hallelujah! but do note that divorce rates' sky rocketing, and cheating happens all the time that its now being passed for "a flaw in human nature". If that "believe" one has in one's marriage turned out to be untrue, then it's not faith, its not belief, its denial.
I did find what Wierenga said about "take holy water to get faith, its a bad way to go" quite funny. great comical sense!
J.L.Schellenberg from the third interview commented on that "you need faith when you don't have believes, and when you have faith, you will have a positive frame of mind, act accordingly" eg, believing/ having faith that someone you love will recover from a terminal illness; faith becomes something you need to sustain yourself. I am fond of this idea, but again, for me I will need some evidence to support my belief.
E. Yoshinaga
In the McGrath interview I felt that the argument that we can have faith in the things that we believe in put all those things that we have faith in may not be true. He goes on to say that we shouldn't run from what is reality but we all believe in things in our life that we believe in and may not be true. I agree with this statement and I believe in God even though it may not be true. I'm going to believe what I want to believe not matter if it is true or if people try to change my way of thinking.
ReplyDeleteIn the Wierenga interview the main concept is whether you have to have truths or reasons behind faith and what you believe in. The question behind that has no simple or even exact answer. Wierenga says that "faith is not contrary to reason", and "faith doesn't require truths". He goes on to mention that everyone has beliefs or faith in something and those people who try to convince others that their faith is correct and they can't do that because everyone thinks differently. This concept is true in a lot of sense. People usually don't switch my beliefs very often ever, even things not about faith or beliefs. It's just because I think differently than everyone else. The holy water comment was quite funny and I think in a sense kind of true as well.
In the Shellenberg interview he explains that belief and faith are two totally different words and each have a specific meaning. He says that faith is something you can do if you try hard enough but trying to believe in something you have to have truth behind it because belief is involuntary. The faith comment behind having a child with terminal illness and having faith that he will make it but not believing is quite interesting. He is trying to say that faith is kind of like imagining and belief is actually physically possible that you can see it. Those arguments seemed really far off but as I looked closer and heard a little more I think that he is correct behind what he says. That you can believe things without faith and you can have faith without believing in it.
There are just some things in life that one just cannot explain therefor this is where faith must come in. While there are some who may say but there has to be more and they demand a justification for that which one places in the category which we call faith. Yet what do we truly accomplish when we analyze and start to place each variable and element into its category? Why must we try to place God in a box so to say?
ReplyDeleteI personally think that we tend to invest too much on reason, for instance John Wesley (the founding father of Methodism) seemed think that reason alone was not enough when one was making a theological decision and he placed value on experience, tradition study and reason.
Therefor I find myself retuning to the remarks which Kuhn made in the first video about how it takes two leaps of faith to believe in God; the being a leap to believe and the second a leap to trust. I say this because one just can-not write off faith based on an explanation or an opinion. One needs to be willing to dive into the waves of faith and allow themselves to be carried into the waters of wonder and not analyze everything in every place, they need to be willing to embrace what one has once called a holy mystery.
I completely agree. We just need to understand not everything has reason or explanation.
DeleteIn these videos the claims that they made were that faith and trust go hand and hand, mortality and belief in Good are similar, and beliefs are involuntary but faith is voluntary. The reasons that were given were that we believe many things that we cannot prove like political beliefs and mortality and we should not imprison ourselves with reason. The common theme of the three videos were that faith is about belief and you have belief of many things without reason or evidence. I still feel the same view now as I did watching the videos because I feel that reason is not always able to explain a belief or faith.
ReplyDeleteI found the first interview extremely interesting. I like that the point is made that we already believe things that we cannot explain. We don't like in a world in which where everything cannot be proven. One of the problems that prevent faith is that we imprison ourselves by truth. Also that truth and faith must be seen one. You can not have one without the other.
ReplyDeleteIn the second video I like that it is mentioned that faith isn't coming from rationality but from within. It is almost like faith is derived from individual perception of the world and events. How does one observe, contemplate, and process what is before them and the meanings that are tagged along. However I believe personally when it comes to faith (religious and non religious), faith is developed only partially and is naturally within us as human beings. Faith walks hand in hand with self actualization. In order to have the will, drive, an motivation one must have faith (vice versa). Some of these qualities effect whether we survive or not. Religion does have its influence on faith but even as a Christian I don't believe its completely God given.
In the third video I like that it is pointed out that there is conceptual confusion. Belief in fact is involuntary. Faith should be voluntary. You can have faith in something but not completely believing. The medical example he used mad perfect sense. Its almost like our imagination can place us in a different world. Also he mentions that might be something that we need in order to cope and or carry out certain duties. This is where I see faith as a natural thing to human beings (partially). In order to psychologically stay focused or stay sane we use our faith in an event (imagination) in order to do so. There are simply some things that we cannot control and that we don't realize that we naturally have within us as human beings. The will and ability to survive comes from the faith in survival.
There are many questions that can not be directly answered. However there are some events that have happened and will happen in our lives that will never have an explanation. One of our biggest mistakes as individuals looking for answers is that we forget to accept life, events, and ideas for what they really are and not search for a covert reason.