Faith and Reason
Student Name
Paradigms used for describing the relationship between faith and reason.
- Faith before reason
The relationship between faith and reason is usually central to establishing the basis of belief. The conventional associations of the faith and reason give rise to the links of the paradigms. The “faith before reason” paradigm is associated with the traditional theist concept. Faith is in this context is described as an assertive position in support of a specific claim or supposition. In the “faith before reason” paradigm, the reason is inferior to faith, and faith is independent of reason. The “faith before reason” paradigm dictates that its ascription alleviates any reason or rationality that contradicts the stance or belief. In essence, this means that reason is always secondary as concerns matters of opinion. The faith emanates from a superior authority or personal conviction, and therefore, it cannot be subject to reason. In this paradigm mainly associated with religious beliefs, the believer is totally committed to the belief irrespective of rational and factual deficiencies.
An advocate for faith before reason Emanuel cant who stated that it is necessary to abandon knowledge or reason to be able to harbor faith. John Locke also objected to
- Objections to the faith before reason paradigm
- The rationalist viewpoint. Rationalists object to this paradigm arguing that any belief that is not backed by reason is meaningless.
- Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle argued that faith could only emerge from reason. Intelligibility, as Plato states, is derived from the form of the good. B. F. Skinner was another scholar who objected to this paradigm.
- Reason before faith paradigm
The reason before faith paradigm considers the importance of faith but only associates faith with reason. In this paradigm, reason supersedes faith. Faith is thus subject to freedom. Those who prescribe to these paradigms assert that trust can only be justified if it conforms to reason or rationality. A concept of reasonable faith arises in this paradigm, which follows an evidentialist principle. This means that beliefs have to be backed up by some kind of evidence. Therefore if a belief does not agree with rationality or has no proof, it is abandoned for a reasonable explanation.
An advocate of reason before faith is John Locke. He argued that faith is reasonable to the extent that the irrationality of religious beliefs conflicts with the belief itself or apparent facts.
- Objections of reason before faith paradigm
- St Paul argued that God does not reveal himself through wisdom but by faith.
- St Thomas argued that no one could achieve truth or reason unless he has faith. He added that one could attain truths of religious beliefs without faith, but the fact would not be complete.
- Faith alone paradigm
In the faith alone paradigm, faith is independent of reason. Faith brings justice and goodness, and it is, therefore, self-sufficient. According to this paradigm, reason contradicts faith because hope is an entity of knowledge itself. The supporters of this paradigm are mostly theists who believe in the divinity of God, which does not require to be supported or defended with reason. The faith alone paradigm ignores any role that reason plays in beliefs. Faith is independent of the input of man, and human reasoning cannot influence it or associate with it. Therefore, all beliefs are valid on account of just and right even if reason, facts, the evidence does not support it.
A significant advocate for the faith alone was Martin Luther King. To Luther, faith and reason were incompatible and that in the religious terms, faith is independent of reason. Faith cannot be illuminated by reason.
- Relationship of reason and faith to the Mythos/logos paradigm
Logos is a Greek term that is similar to reason and which refers to the rationality that enables people to function effectively. Mythos like logos was a Greek word that enabled human beings to be able to live effectively amidst the strange world. Logos helped human beings organize themselves into societies and to survive in the ancient world. Logos are more objective in trying to control the environment and innovation. However, logos had limitations that caused human beings to find the meaning of life. Mythos and logos are complementary and related to reason and faith. The mythos/logos paradigm is similar to the reason/faith paradigm because they both relate to how beliefs are concerned. Like the reason/faith paradigm, the mythos/logos paradigm establishes conflicts in terms of which comes before the other or which of the two, the best measure of valid and invalid beliefs are. However, the mythos/logos paradigm has a more traditional explanation of the concepts of knowledge and trust. The logos, unlike reason, is instinctive and primitive because it is informed by the need to survive rather than the free rational actions of right. Similarly, mythos is grounded on the need to establish meanings for phenomenon while faith is a more liberal and independent concept.
- Objection/ problem of faith before reason paradigm
The notion that God is unbounded by the temporal sequence is challenged by the fact that it would then mean that there are no limitations of time to God. This means that God is present in different places at the same time but also at different places at different times. Therefore, there are no limits of future and present to God, but He remains stable in this eternal presence. This complexity established by lack of time and place limits and how God maintains his state in those different parameters at the same time (and at different times) contradicts with reason.
The objection could be answered by the fact that God is outside time, and thus, the rules of time do not apply to Him. Additionally, it could be translated to mean that God is the creator and owner of time, which leaves him independent of it.
The faith counters these objections before reason paradigm in that belief should not necessarily be proven with facts and evidence. Also, the paradigm establishes that faith supersedes reason when it comes to the justification of belief. Faith is superior to reason and the reason; therefore, it only complements faith, but they are not at equal status. The objections that arise due to the disagreement of the belief with rationality are therefore unmerited because they cease to be the valid one they contradict with faith.
References
Swindal, J. (2001). Faith and reason. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, par, 1.