One way to resolve this debate is to understand that reason is 2-D thinking. Reason is based on cause and affect, which is analogous to plane that has been labeled with an (x,y) axis system; cause and affect, onto which we draw rational drawings.
There is also 3-D thinking, which has three axis (x,y,z). This is more like a cube than a plane. Science is based on 2-D systems; age of reason, but it also tries to approximate 3-D, with theories like quantum theory, and math tools like statistics, but neither are fully based on 3-D logic.
The 2-D system is more left brain, while the 3-D system is right brain. The 2-D system is about differential logic. While the 3-D system is more about integral logic. Science is more left brain, whereas religion and instinct is more right brained. God is a 3-D concept that goes beyond 2-D logic.
As an analogy, picture a 3-D concept, as 3-D ball. It has height, depth and width. This 3-D ball can be approximated with a large number of circles, all with a common center, each at a different angle. Each circle is a 2-D rational plane, with the sum of all these planes, able to approximate the 3-D logic ball. All our opinions; logic planes, on a subject, allows us as a team, to approximate 3-D concepts. We may feel the 3-D unity with an intuition that is hard to put into words.
Say I hit this 3-D ball with a bat. The ball will deform under the stresses of being struck. This can be modeled using continuum mechanics, which is 3-D math used in engineering. In terms of all the 2-D planes, that are used to approximate the 3-D ball, what is a logical deformation in 3-D, will cause the 2-D planes to move out of their logic planes; bending. This structural change will appear illogical; defy cause and affect, as had been defined by each plane.
Statistics is about rational planes, that have been moved out their 2-D space, due to 3-D logic deformations. They sense the deformation but they do not try to explain the 3-D change. These deformations can defy 2-D logic, but may be fully consistent with 3-D logic. For example, science assumes life formed by a random series of events, that has no sound 2-D logic. This theory goes beyond 2-D toward 3-D. This is deformed 2-D plane moving out its normal space. However, at the level of 3-D logic, this would be explain as a logical change in 3-D.
As another example of the contrast, we all have the hunger instinct. This is a 3-D logic ball. Theoretically, there are a very wide range of food items that could satisfy the needs of human hunger. These foods are scattered all over the earth. A vegan will restrict their diet to a subset of all possible foods that could satisfy the 3-D instinct.
Once this data set is narrowed down and defined, the vegan can use 2-D logic of cause and affect, to put together a healthy diet. However, this diet does not make use of the entire spectrum of foods, theoretically defined by the 3-D logic of the hunger instinct. Reason can differentiate itself into a subset of 3-D; 2-D rational plane, where the exceptions in 2-D, do not exist in 3-D.
Say the vegan made a diet, that was lacking in certain nutrients, not contained fully, in just veggies. These extra foods are still a subset of the 3-D hunger instinct, even though it is not part of 2-D vegan logic. The internal 3-D hunger ball, is struck by the unconscious mind, to create an urge to accommodate the 3-D need. This is felt as an urge to leave the 2-D vegan logic plane, for something that is not seen as logical, in terms of the vegan logic set. This urge may be denied. There is a tendency for the left brain to abort deformation in 2-D, even those from 3-D changes that are sound. This is mostly because 3-D is not fully conscious.
