Aside From Being Self Serving, Can Religious Faith Ever Be Rational?

[Truthseeker]

As far as I'm concerned, faith has to be rational. It is more than that, but it is rational.

 

[PureX]

As far as I'm concerned, faith has to be rational. It is more than that, but it is rational.

I think nearly everyone has a rationale for what they choose to place their faith in. What they don't have is proof in advance that their choice is correct. Because that's what faith is: trust in advance of any proof, that what one hopes and/or believes to be so, will be so. This is NOT an irrational course of action when sufficient evidence is not available to determine and choose a reasonable course of action, and when some course of action must nevertheless be chosen and embarked upon.

 

[Skwim]

What's wrong with self-serving? Faith can be very useful to a person going through hard times. Sometimes the important question to ask is not "Is this rational?" it's to ask "Is this useful?"

There's nothing wrong with it. I'm simply trying to see if anyone feels religious faith, in of itself, is rational. And from the replies I've received that have challenged the question it appears that aside from its self-serving aspect it's quite difficult to see any such rationality. And this is apparently upsetting to some people. One of those things, like god's announcement that he creates evil, the faithful would rather shove under the table. But. so be it. If they can't deal with it, then they can't deal with it.

.

.

 

[Skwim]

As far as I'm concerned, faith has to be rational.

Is it rational to avoid using the toilet because you trust in your belief that the sharp-toothed toilet monster will get you?

.

 

[PureX]

There's nothing wrong with it. I'm simply trying to see if anyone feels religious faith, in of itself, is rational. And from the replies I've received that have challenged the question it appears that aside from it self-serving aspect it's quite difficult to see any such rationality. And this is apparently upsetting to some people. One of those things, like god's announcement that he creates evil, the faithful would rather shove under the table. But. so be it. If they can't deal with it, then they can't deal with it.

Perhaps that's because you are conflating the rather broad concept that we call "faith" with a very narrow and specific religious platitude that claims "God creates evil".

 

[Skwim]

Perhaps that's because you are conflating the rather broad concept that we call "faith" with a very narrow and specific religious platitude that claims "God creates evil".

So that's what you think of god's word, a religious platitude.

Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things
​

So be it.

.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

So is this rational or not? Or are you still sitting there until everyone else goes through and there's no one else at the intersection?
.

Of course it's not rational. that doesn't mean we don't do it every day.

 

[LuisDantas]

---Keep in mind that faith is nothing more than trust in belief---


Yes

Because ______________________________________________________________________________________.
​

No

Because ______________________________________________________________________________________ .

.​

Sorry, @Skwim , but this OP demands too many arbitrary premises.

If you want replies from people that agree that religious faith is self-serving and "nothing more than trust in belief", that is your prerogative. But that will make the representativeness of the results suspect.

 

[LuisDantas]

That which is rational, by definition, is not faith. That which is faith is not rational.

That is a common definition of the word, but hardly the clear, most proper one.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Faith is belief in something in the absence of evidence, not necessarily in contradiction to evidence. The former is compatible with rational thinking. The latter is not.

Rational thinking only goes as far as the evidence leads. If the evidence doesn’t support a conclusion, then jumping to the conclusion is irrational, even if it isn’t clear that the conclusion is necessarily false.

 

[Sunstone]

Rational thinking only goes as far as the evidence leads. If the evidence doesn’t support a conclusion, then jumping to the conclusion is irrational, even if it isn’t clear that the conclusion is necessarily false.

I didn't say faith was rational, I said it could be compatible with rational thinking.

 

[Apologes]

Faith in general? Of course, it simply denotes holding a certain belief and thinking it is true. If said belief is rational and you haven't made any epistemic errors on your part then you are perfectly rational to have faith/to believe that.

Blind faith? Almost nevet except some cases such as being offered a pill to save your life and taking it on your deathbed even if you can't determine whether that pill will actually do what you are told. The belief that it will save you is certainly without reasons (blind faith) yet the choice still seems rational since it seems far worse to not even try the pill as then your doom would be certain.

 

[Frankie85]

---Keep in mind that faith is nothing more than trust in belief---


Yes

Because ______________________________________________________________________________________.
​

No

Because ______________________________________________________________________________________ .

.​

No.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I didn't say faith was rational, I said it could be compatible with rational thinking.

I know. I was disagreeing with what you said. Unjustified leaps to conclusions are irrational and therefore incompatible with rational thinking.

 

[Kenny]

Not faith in general, but RELIGIOUS faith. Is it rational?

.

It is the same "faith".

The problem here is that we want to "separate" what is indivisible. You can make a distinction in application but it is the same faith.

You can have irrational faith in application in the natural realm as you can have irrational faith in the spiritual realm... but it is still faith. The natural and the spiritual can have a distinction but they are indivisible.

 

[Audie]

It is the same "faith".

The problem here is that we want to "separate" what is indivisible. You can make a distinction in application but it is the same faith.

You can have irrational faith in application in the natural realm as you can have irrational faith in the spiritual realm... but it is still faith. The natural and the spiritual can have a distinction but they are indivisible.

It is still faith in the sense that a sore throat,
a bayonet thingy, a violin bow thingy, a Frenchman
and a hoppy amphibian are all frogs.

Why religious folk who hold their faith as
a highest value want to define it as the same
as faith that it will be cheerios in the cheerios
box, instead of pickled pigs feet is a mystery
to me.

Equivocation, it is a favourite vice!

Oh and seperate natural from "spiritual"? ("realm")

Easy as frog pie! One is real,the other imaginary.
Could hardly be more distinct!

In comparison, the hoppy amphibian and Charles
DeGaulle are similar as identical twins.

 

[Skwim]

Sorry, @Skwim , but this OP demands too many arbitrary premises.

Name two.

If you want replies from people that agree that religious faith is self-serving

Not at all, and I never suggested as much.

and "nothing more than trust in belief", that is your prerogative.

Hey, if you feel the game is too hard and you don't want to play, feel free to take your marbles and go home. You seem to have a lot of company. I suspect that those who have chosen not to answer most likely can't find any rationality to the religious faith I'm asking about.

But that will make the representativeness of the results suspect.

So far failing to get a single response that honestly stuck to my question and addressed, it I haven't the slightest idea of what could be representative or not. And in your case here, I fail to see why the definition of "faith" I provided would "make the representativeness of the results suspect."

.
.

 

[Skwim]

It is the same "faith".

Have a good day.

.

 

[Kenny]

Hey, if you feel the game is too hard and you don't want to play, feel free to take your marbles and go home. You seem to have a lot of company. I suspect that those who have chosen not to answer most likely can't find any rationality to the religious faith I'm asking about.

Have a good day.

is the game too hard that you couldn't address the reality?

 

[Audie]

is the game too hard that you couldn't address the reality?

You know the reality? Would you like to,
tell us about it?