Question It is commonly stated that evidence, reason and logic are inadequate and inappropriate for claims of the existence of a god, transcendent or supernatural beings or phenomena, etc., and that faith alone must be relied upon. Unless I'm missing something then on these grounds, there can be no misguided faith(s), since to distinguish between misguided and valid faith one would have to give a reason why a particular faith is in one category vs. the other, contradicting its own status, correct? My question: is faith ever valid?

Accepted:
June 16, 2006

Comments

Saying that faith is important is not to say that it is the only important factor in religion. It not unusual for believers to claim that there are good rational grounds for their particular faith that do not apply to other apparent faiths. For example, a Christian might say that there is good reason to believe that Jesus was resurrected, since there were witnesses and they gave reliable reports on it. Muslims often point to the inimitable nature of the Qur'an to establish its incontrovertibly divine origins. It may be that adherence to one of these religions is based on faith, but once that step is taken, good arguments might be found to confirm it. To take a secular example, right now I believe that as I am typing this there is not a huge and terrifying monster behind me about to chew off my head. I believe this on the basis of faith, since I am looking at the screen. When I turn round I shall confirm my faith on the basis of evidence. This is the approach of many religious thinkers, and seems eminently reasonable.