• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is more important for the future well-being of humankind: Faith or Reason?

Faith or Reaon?

  • Reason

    Votes: 70 90.9%
  • Faith

    Votes: 7 9.1%

  • Total voters
    77

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I wish people would stop calling it a false dichotomy (although calling us "human beans" is pretty awesome). Faith is believing something without evidence. Reason is believing something after applying logic to the evidence that's available. They are opposite ways to determine what's true and real. Both of them can exist in the world, but we can also keep one and get rid of the other and be perfectly fine.
Wait... are you saying faith is one way to determine what's true and real?
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
You can have your reason. I like seeing the word without reason.

I see butterflies and dragons in the sky with my kids.
I talk of angels and dreamcatchers protecting them when they sleep.
I know a jolly old guy that laughs and brings my kids toys.
Leprechuns and 4 leaf clovers bring us good luck.
A shinny Heads up penny's bring a smile to my face.
I know love


This is far more important to me than evolution, the big bang theory, paleontology etc. I hope your reason makes you as happy.
 

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
I wish people would stop calling it a false dichotomy (although calling us "human beans" is pretty awesome). Faith is believing something without evidence. Reason is believing something after applying logic to the evidence that's available. They are opposite ways to determine what's true and real. Both of them can exist in the world, but we can also keep one and get rid of the other and be perfectly fine.

I disagree that faith is believing in something without evidence, it is believing in something that cannot be seen. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith. It tells me that I am here and I see that I am. It tells me that the world had a beginning and science backs that up. It tells me that man has a fallen human nature and we have evidence of that. It tells me that Jesus saves and I see evidence of changed lives. It tells me we all die and I see that.

Faith and reason go hand in hand. Not that there aren’t unreasonable people in the world, such as those that deny faith when they use it every day. Have you ever bought something that you didn’t try out in the store first? Of course, we all have. Your reason said that it was okay, but you still had to have faith to do that. Humans operate and function on faith, or else we couldn’t move. We couldn’t go to bed unless we had a reasonable faith that we would wake up. We couldn’t plan anything unless we had a reasonable faith that we would do it in the future. It even takes faith to believe that the world would be better off with no religion.
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
You can have your reason. I like seeing the word without reason.

I see butterflies and dragons in the sky with my kids.
I talk of angels and dreamcatchers protecting them when they sleep.
I know a jolly old guy that laughs and brings my kids toys.
Leprechuns and 4 leaf clovers bring us good luck.
A shinny Heads up penny's bring a smile to my face.
I know love
Then I suppose you don't consider this beautiful?
 

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
Here is the Biblical definition of faith. Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

We see that there can be evidence of things not seen.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
We see that there can be evidence of things not seen.
That looks contradictory. Fans of reason would use a broad definition of the word "see", which includes finding evidence
for something as seeing. Example: We can't see atoms with a naked eye, but we can observe atomic phenomena which
amount to seeing atoms. But when it comes to gods & such, similarly objective evidence is sorely lacking.
 

lunamoth

Will to love
Is there more to life and more to being human than what we can put under a microscope and objectively know?

If so, what is the basis of this more?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Is there more to life and more to being human than what we can put under a microscope and objectively know?
We won't know until we know it. Until then, to presume that this "more" is known in great detail (eg, religious dogma) is hubris.
 
Last edited:

waitasec

Veteran Member
I disagree that faith is believing in something without evidence, it is believing in something that cannot be seen. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith. It tells me that I am here and I see that I am. It tells me that the world had a beginning and science backs that up. It tells me that man has a fallen human nature and we have evidence of that. It tells me that Jesus saves and I see evidence of changed lives. It tells me we all die and I see that.

Faith and reason go hand in hand. Not that there aren’t unreasonable people in the world, such as those that deny faith when they use it every day. Have you ever bought something that you didn’t try out in the store first? Of course, we all have. Your reason said that it was okay, but you still had to have faith to do that. Humans operate and function on faith, or else we couldn’t move. We couldn’t go to bed unless we had a reasonable faith that we would wake up. We couldn’t plan anything unless we had a reasonable faith that we would do it in the future. It even takes faith to believe that the world would be better off with no religion.

what is your definition of empirical evidence?
 

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
That looks contradictory. Fans of reason would use a broad definition of the word "see", which includes finding evidence
for something as seeing. Example: We can't see atoms with a naked eye, but we can observe atomic phenomena which
amount to seeing atoms. But when it comes to gods & such, similarly objective evidence is sorely lacking.

We didn't see the big bang, but scientists believe that it happened because of evidence. That is forensic evidence, not objective.
 

lunamoth

Will to love
We won't know until we know it. Until then, to presume that this "more" is known in great detail (eg, religious dogma) is hubris.

Hi Revoltingest,

I'm not sure why you refer to 'until then,' as if we somehow will know at a future date what we don't know now. Why did you phrase it that way?

For you, is there more to being human than what is objectively knowable?

luna
 

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
what is your definition of empirical evidence?

If you have a point make it, so I can destroy it. And stop asking me what my definition of words are, it gets old.

What is your definition of is
What is your definition of you
What is your definition of definition
What is your definition of what
What is your definition of of

:facepalm:
 

Zadok

Zadok
Some seem to think that reason should take a backseat to faith. While others seem to believe not only is faith unnecessary but it is detrimental.

So which do you think is more important to humanity and why?

Faith is the only means to take us from what is currently known to greater understanding of anything. I believe we error whenever we rip faith and reason apart and attempt to proceed with just one or the other.

Zadok
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Never!!!!! Without both Humans would not exist.

Sorry, but that's incorrect.

Whats funny is that no matter how many people tell you so you refuse to believe which shows you have great faith in at least yourself.

I do have great faith in myself, in the sense that I have confidence in myself, but not in the sense of believing in myself without evidence.

What's funny is that you still refuse to try to understand what I'm saying, and now you think an appeal to numbers is not a fallacy. It doesn't matter how many people say it, it's still not true. If 1 million people told you the holocaust didn't happen, would you believe them?
 
Top