You're invited to check out the public beta of the all-new version of Big Think!
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Re: Are faith and reason incompatible?

(15)
Peter Gomes
Uploaded on 11/06/2007

Description: The Russian cosmonauts did not find God up there.

Transcript: I haven’t found any scientific advance that explains joy, or happiness, or genuine peace. Or that has achieved perfect satisfaction in mind, body or state. I haven’t found any scientific discovery that’s done that. There was the great cynical observation that when we started exploring outer space, that we might actually find where heaven was. And the Russian cosmonauts were supposed to report back as to whether God existed. Did they find him up there? And nobody did. Or medical science, when it _____ operating on the brain, or the very interior of the human body, could never quite find the soul. They keep looking and they never managed to do it. It seems to me that science could never explain such things as joy, or happiness, or sorrow, even though they try to find the little nodes in the brain in which these emotions are alleged to reside. And thus it seems to me science is able to describe certain realities, but it has it limits. And religion goes beyond those limits. That’s why they call it faith. That’s why it’s exciting. It seems much more exciting to me to be a pioneer on the frontiers of faith, than working out my salvation in some laboratory hoping that I’ll discover something in a jar of chemical unknowns. I think that’s very unlikely.

Recorded on: 6/12/07

 

 

17
3
3
Responses
SORT BY
Re: Re: Are faith and reason incompatible?

Short answer. No.

Both faith and science look to answer the unknown. the problem lies in that there are certain things that we can never know.  like what happens when you die. or how did we get here in the first place.

It is said that there are certain infallible truths, such as the laws of nature as well as mathematics. so I think everyone can agree that the universe is apparently ordered in some way shape or form.  people have been seeing this order (which some may call God) in this physical universe we find ourselves in we have developed tools of reasoning to use our past experiences of this oberved order to act in the future in a world with the same characteristics of the past.

science is a best guess now and a fix it later kind of situation.  we didn't always know that the earth wasn't in the center of the universe or that light travels in waves, but we experiment and test and continue to advance and further our base of knowledge. 

 religion attempts to not necessarily substitute for science and reasoning, but continue where science cannot go.  to the unknowable.  what is the essence of things? finding meaning in this that are undefinable like beauty, and viture.  that that is ungraspable. 

 people find satisfaction in labeling things and achieving a certain "truth" to a question or an idea.  but the problem arises when paradoxes and exceptions ruin a basis of all understanding.  that fact is. there are no facts. there is nothing that can be said that cannot be quesiotned.  besides nothing makes sense.  for example.  the big bag.  either. time infinitly regresses, (which doesn't make sense). or it started at some infinitly dense particle exploding a long time ago and made the universe what we see in the hubble today, (which doesn't make sense either).  they say science tells us that the universe is expanding.  My question is expanding into what?! nothingness??? again doesn't make sense, but the most brilliant minds of our time tell us that this is they way that it is.

 SO.  what now? a choitic and ordered universe made from scratch,that has been here forever, that has defined characteristics that can't be fully defined! EASY TO EXPLAIN! why ask anymore questions right!??

To me this is where faith comes in.  And it is definitly a leap that one has to conciously make to discredit the reasonable,and approach the unknowable or the devine or the infinite (whatever you want to call it).  the crazy "coincidences" we see in this chaotic mess of a world.  I say GOD you are right. this SH*T makes no sense!  But I know that there is SOMETHING.  I don't know what it is aND IF i COMPREHENDED THE TOTALITY OF ALL KNOWLEDGE MY HEAD WOULD MOST CERTAINLY EXPLODE. SO I TAKE THE LEAP. AND GO BEYOND REASON AND LEAVE IT TO FAITH THAT THERE IS SOMETHING MORE, SOMETHING MORE THAT IS SO CRAZY THAT IT COULD MAKE A ROUNDSQUARE.  BUT SOMETHING THAT NOBODY COULD FULLY UNDERSTAND LET ALONE EXPLAIN>

So, use science to better understand ourselves, these undefinable beings, in a physical and ordered world.  but that will only take us so far.  FAITH is needed to explain it all.  and it still fails to do that. 

so everyone need to use both.  rationality for reality, and faith for what is collectively felt but individually explained.  have a personal relationship with the voice in your head and you'll understand more than any book can explain.

because hey. this might all just be some crazy dream!

0
0
Re: Re: Are faith and reason incompatible?
Faith and Reason.  So much can be said about the two!  I don't agree with everything Mr. Gomes said but I think he touched on an important point.  Science is a neccasarily limited methodology.  The scientific methodology is designed to make quantitative measurements of the exterior surfaces.  It is not designed to gather and analyze data on qualitative internal phenomenon, such as awareness.  Other methodologies are better suited for that.  Like those developed in psychology but also those developed in many of the world traditions.  It's called meditation.

The two aren't incompatible but one can not be reduced into the other.  Because they are both partial perspectives focusing on different aspects of reality.  Specifically qualitative phenomenon that happens in interior awareness, and 3rd person measurement of the exterior world.
3
0
Re: Re: Are faith and reason incompatible?
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I tend to view "faith" and "reason" as incompatible; in fact, I see them as diametrically opposed to one another.

From a semantics standpoint, there is a world of difference between the two terms.  Reason, on the one hand, is a verified (and verifiable) fact that logically justifies either a premise or conclusion.  From its definition, one gets the sense that reason involves an evidentiary inquest.  Faith, on the other hand, is something entirely different.  By its definition, faith implies a trust, belief, or acceptance without evidence or investigation.  From this perspective, faith and reason appear to be strict antonyms, rather than compatible terms.

I am troubled when I hear people try to force together the terms, as if they were jamming a square peg into a round hole.  To argue, as some have, that faith is what happens when you exhaust reason is insulting to the very foundations of academia.  In academic inquiries, the conclusions we draw must always be based upon the credible evidence that we have at our disposal.  Any academic worth his or her salt would find it reprehensible to say, when the evidence and logic does not support the hypothesis, that you can simply continue believe something to be true.  As far as I'm concerned, this sort of faith is not a virtue.

I have heard others remark that faith and reason are compatible because they can be interchanged to answer life's questions.  The specific quote, I believe, was that faith is important because  "reason and science can't explain everything."  There are too many things wrong with this statement to catalogue in this post; suffice it to say that such utterances make the hair on my neck stand on end.  It is a non sequitur (that is: it does not follow) that if science or reason doesn't yet have the answer to a question that faith should automatically become the default alternative.  Why would faith be an appropriate substitute for reason?  Faith has a terrible track record when it comes to getting things right (see: the shape of the Earth, the nature of the solar system, the cause of disease and natural disasters etc, etc., etc!)  I would have thought that faith lost its right to sit beside reason, as a method of observation, a long time ago.

I cannot be sure of the motivation behind such attempts to force together faith and reason.  I would suspect that it is done in an effort to bolster the credibility of faith, specifically religious faith, so that faith can give the appearance of having a logical or evidentiary basis.  In reality, by arguing for interconnectivity between faith and reason, one establishes a false compatibility that subverts the natural tension between the terms.  Reason relies solely on logic and the evidence to form a conclusion; faith implies the willingness to maintain a belief, in the face of contrary (or lacking) evidence and logic.

Some might find it sophomoric to harp incessantly on the definition of the terms -- everyone cringes at the freshman paper that begins: "The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term _____ as ____."  However, I would argue that it is important, in this case, to understand what these terms mean.  Failing to do so enhances the possibility that one will misunderstand the nature of the question and wrongly (in my opinion) argue for compatibility between faith and reason.  In the end, faith and reason are very different things.  They are not, in my estimation, the least bit compatible.
20
0
PAGE
1