It seems to come up so often, as if faith and logic were mortal enemies. Can you please explain why you see it that way? If you see the opposite, why?
Quite frankly, I have NO problem with it.
It isn't. It's just there are more atheists/rationalists/agnostics on this forum that are 'logical.'
Don't have time to lay out a big argument...but this is a fact. (Some of those are NOT as logical as they think, either.) However, that being said, I am tolerant and respectful all beliefs, unless they are very narrow minded or harmful.
Logic belives in the Tangible
Faith in the Intangible
True enough, but that doesn't cover all possibilties in life. Does it?
But i'm not here to argue.
It's a wonderful day, and life is great !!
Please don't takeme as argumentative, in the confrontational sense. I want to "understand" what the big deal is? As I said, my faith is perfectly logical to me, but not others.
I'm sure your Logic is idealistic ,then.
Abstract Logic can't accept something that can't be proven to exist.
Good that your faith is logical for you. just stick to it, and be happy
good day for everyone, including fanatic believers around here !!
Hi Tantrum, gotta go. Just wanted to say again that your new avatar looks fantastic.
faith is personal, it is sometimes clouded by emotions, but logic, you always separate your emotions from it, you use deductions, which is scientific
Actually, it does.
Logic believe in the Tangible. Meaning, Reality is all knowable. Everything we can prove that exists is knowable.
Faith in the intangible- covers everything outside of reality. The things are unknown or not real.
I thought Tantrum did quite a good job at labeling in such short amount of words.
And, I had to use so many, just to back up what she said. That's sad!
The real question would be if you have no problem with it, then why should it matter? If whatever an Atheist follows works for them in their life then why should any of us care?
Does their unbelief in God, lessen or cheapen a believer's faith? It shouldn't and if it does, then the believer is the one with issues not the Atheist.
Does your faith in God, in any way cheapen or lessen their quality or value of life? It shouldn't again if it does then the Atheist has some issues to deal with.
Point being once again we are going into an issue on the forums meant to expose and highlight the differences between people, and set the boundaries of what makes them so, instead of exploring why this is such a good thing and beneficial to both.
Atheist cause believers to examine their faith more closely and to evaluate its strength and meaning. I think in the examination of faiths limits, many Atheist are driven to explore the world ever further and to develop more answers to life's questions. Both drive the other on. Faith can be a tool to expand logic, and likewise logic faith.
It's a false front. Faith requires logic. When we see Creation it's only logical to assume there is a Creator now we must ask which Creator. I choose the God of the bible because He is where the evidence really leads. That is my logical conclusion. Great topic!
I think it depends on what you have faith in. I have faith that my car will start. I have faith that I will not get sick. But I don't have faith in the proposition that Jesus was God's son. I don't have faith that Jesus rose from the dead. I don't have faith that the Bible is the inspired word of God. To me, it only makes sense to have faith in natural phenomena. It seems to me that anything else is illogical.
But having faith that your car will start is exactly the same as believing in the invisible super being. I mean - you do not absolutely know 100% it will start, and you do not have a time machine to have gone forward in time to make sure it did/will have/going to have started, therefore it is logical to believe in the super being. I love it when they use the argument that just because you believe in one thing without 100% certainty, you should therefore believe in the invisible super being.
And they do not seem to understand how funny that argument is.
Or how illogical.
Maybe it is the principals of faith that don't mesh well with logic.
Faith is good when it doesn't hurt anyone else.
I have a faith, not necessarily the same as you or anyone else. I admit. I do depend on something rather spiritual to get me through the emotionally tough times. I admit, I depend on faith to give me a certain kind of courage. The kind of courage that gets you to sing in front of an audience when your scare shiteless. lol
But if it wasn't for logic, people would be jumping off buildings believing they wont get hurt (that or some heavy drugs), not sure what the difference is.
So all in all, logic wins over faith. If I only depended on faith, I would have died a long time ago.
I think you need to define what faith you are referring to. If you are referring to Christian's faith, then logic and Christianity cannot work together.
If you use Buddhism and logic, it can definitely work together.
Believing in an alien religion and logic, that can work together.
Some religions can work with logic but some can't.
Logic is a method. It is not the same thing as scientific method though it is a part of it. For example, logic can be used to test a hypothesis, but it cannot, of itself, source a hypothesis. (Because any hypothesis sourced by logic alone was already implied by the initial conditions).
Logic can be used to check the consistency of a set of statements, but not their truth, except with reference to the axioms of the particular field (axioms which might have no absolute truth). For example logic can demonstrate that two different accounts of a miracle are inconsistent and cannot both be true. It cannot say that both are false.
It is possible to build up a huge edifice of theological dogma which is entirely self consistent. Many of the 'divines' throughout history devoted their lives to this. But the fundamental 'axiom' that God exists is not strengthened in the process.
You can't use logic to justify faith. You can use it to improve your building on the other side of the bridge of faith.
Does that help?
God belief is not formed on the basis of objective, verifiable evidence. It is formed on the basis of experience resulting from the interpretation of certain texts, religious rituals, other religious experience and reasoning. This type of belief without material evidence is what I think most people refer to when they talk about faith in a religious context.
I think confusion arises when people refer to this type of belief as illogical in the sense of irrational as opposed to illogical in the sense of logically invalid. The former is the more common usage of the term. The latter a more formal and technical usage. Theistic beliefs can be illogical in the former sense, i.e. based on experience, emotion, personal feelings, intuition etc., but logical in the latter sense, i.e. logically valid and consistent. So I think it's a communication problem more than anything else.
If you are referring to religious faith, it is probably because that kind of faith, by definition, means belief in a God that you've never seen physically. So for many, faith isn't logical, because if you can't see it, then how do you know it exists? (This is the kind of question those who think faith and logic don't mix...ask.)
OK? But if you DO see something, then do you need faith "for it"?
"I see a chair". Is that faith?
Where the problem comes in is when we all see the chair and we all can not agree upon what we have seen.
I see a chair, my grandchild may see a lunch table, someone else sees a step stool. Each will have faith in their own perception.
By any other name a chair is still a chair. And I think that faith and logic are both sitting in that chair like kissing cousins.
Faith is the substance of things *hoped for*, the evidence of things *not seen*. (Hebrews 11:1) So, no, seeing a chair isn't faith. If you see it, you know it's there. Faith is believing (or hoping) in that which you have NOT seen.
I don't see the incompatibility.
There are people, from what I have read here that have an animus against christians who are being intolerant when they tell people that they are sinners for not following God and if you are starting this thread for that reason then you deserve any recrimination that you get.
And then there are some who are just plain bullies and haters of christians. I'm not quite sure where that's coming from. Maybe a mean nun stole and ate their Ho-hos when they were kids and it traumatized them, who knows? Anyway be prepared for their unpleasantness.
Thanks for the warning.
I have copped much over the months for my beliefs.
I am actually asking those to whom you refer, since it is one of their arguments, or better said ridicules. I don't seek argument, but no doubt some will offer plenty of it.
Time will tell.
Very Intelligent Response. Brilliant.
I'm with flightkeeper on this one, I don't see the incompatibility.
Your belief is your faith and your logic is the reasoning you use to support that belief.
The problem comes in when two sides of the coin don't understand the others faith and logic and how they could come to those conclusions.
LOL, here you go:
I've never seen a quark - and neither has anybody else. Does that mean quarks do not exist?
Belief in God is no greater an intellectual challenge than belief in the laws of physics.
Logic reaches its limitations at the edge of the physical universe and is of little use when the subject of inquiry exists beyond the boundaries of space and time.
Hi Peter, I agree with you. However there many people who prefer science over religion. They associate logic with science and not with religion. I think most, myself included, have not read a lot of papers written by christian philosophers which is why most people here think christians are crazy. Anyway they find it more acceptable to believe in a quark because scientists say it exists even though we've never seen it.
Just because no one has seen your invisible super being - it must exist huh?
See - this is where faith and logic collide.
The two aren't incompatible, and there comes a point where one stops and the other begins. If human beings had relied only on logic we never would have learned to fly, built the automobile, harnessed nuclear energy or went to the moon. All of these things were heralded by logical minds as impossible, but there are always those that believe despite what logic and reasoning say that anything is possible. Faith is not wishing, it's seeing something your mind believes is possible. There is nothing weak or insane in that. Despite what some of the bullies might say on the forums, faith is essential for human life and goes way beyond religion and belief but into every aspect of our potential and accomplishment as a species. It is what separates us from the plain and ordinary and allows us to do the extraordinary.
Allow me to make a prediction.
All the believers who have faith cannot understand why this is not logic.
All the non believers do not understand how having faith in something is logical.
And never the twain shall meet. And the religionist who started the thread is not looking for an answer - as usual he wants to try and persuade us non-believers that having blind faith in the invisible sky fairy is perfectly logical.
Sadly, the definition of the word "logic" does not include a lack of reasoning. And yes, "I cannot imagine that there is not a god," is not reasoning. It is faith.
Although - what is wrong with having faith exactly? I thought that was a requirement.
NO, NOT allowed. I didn't ask for predictions, but explanations. Waiting!!!
What exactly does THIS mean?
So you do NOT use faith in your life for anything??? Curious!!
I use faith all the time. But I do not confuse it with logic.
Perhaps it would be better if you gave me what you consider to be your definition of the word "logic" and then we can take it from there.
So, your faith is also irrational, if you don't confuse it with logic. Or is your faith somehow logical?
How long did it take to draw that conclusion?
You can not touch or see God.
You can not touch or see a ray of light.
You can see only see those things that light comes in contact with
You can not touch them; yet we are touched by them
When we look for proof for the existence of logic using the same rules as is placed upon proving the existence of God, the logical mind should ascertain that logic does not exist.
Therefore FAITH in things is all that can be proven.
I have faith that faith exists.
Logic and faith are incompatible insofar as one overrides the other. So if you allow your faith to be informed by logic and also by observation of the world around you then there is clearly no incompatibility.
But many people choose to allow their faith to override logic. So, for example, they might deny the science of evolution, which is the logical explanation of the world around us, in favour of their prior belief system. For these people logic and faith are incompatible.
Don’t know about faith but Christianity and logic are at odds.
A Christian claiming to believe in logic reflects a blatant contradiction of ideals and thinking creating a status of hypocrite. For only a hypocrite can claim that a person (eve) actually held a two-way conversation with a snake and yet claims the status of being logical.
And I'll bet you are likeall the rest of us who "talk to (or swear at) inanimate objects when they don't go the way you want them to.
A better example of hypocrite might be, "yes I know smoking is bad for my health, but I do it anyway".
Don’t remember ever meeting a Christian that did not seem a hypocrite…sorry if you
think I’m a rat.
It seems that one of the definitions of hypocrite would be a christian.
Oh another poster whose bigoted towards Christians...moving on.
Your eminence...please point out why my post does not make good sense to you.
When i posted to "your eminence" i wasn't posting to you...sir.
A literal interpretation of every passage of the Bible would be illogical, especially since not all of it is meant to be taken word-for-word literally.
Thankfully, Biblical literalism is not a fundamental tenet of Christianity. Therefore illogical beliefs about two day conversations with a literal talking snake (and where did the Bible say the conversation took place over two days, anyway?) are not fundamental to Christianity.
Word for word = Logic
Interpretation = Faith
Do they not teach these things in college?
What you are saying is that you are allowed to pick and choose what parts of your bible you wish to abide by...cool.
Valerie...i did't say two day conversation...i said two-way.
Dogma, not religion itself, is at odds not only with logic, but with scientific reasoning as well.
Not all religions are dogmatic, but most are. Those that require you to believe certain things have obviously closed themselves off from discovery that might conflict with their dogma.
Speaking from my personal experience as a Jew, Judaism is not a dogmatic religion--it is a religion that focuses on deeds rather than beliefs. Beliefs are subject to truth, which is not a statement of faith but the result of an unfolding process of inquiry without an end.
Nope…your example of hypocrisy won’t fly…hypocrisy is more like preaching one thing and acting out the opposite…or similar.
I think logic and faith are polar opposites. Logic explains things in black and white. Faith justifies things with beliefs.
I have to agree with you. Nice explanation. I think it is also safe to say that faith contradicts logic.
Jimmy & Marine - let's not confuse logic with scientific method, of which it is only a small part. Logic largely has to do with language and its usage, especially consistency of arguments and groups of statements. Logic and mathematics are also very closely related (see Russell & Whitehead). Faith is irrational rather than illogical. Faith contradicts reason - not quite the same thing. Logic treats 'God' and 'stone' identically, as nouns. Reason differentiates between them.
If a sentence is logically correct, it should not contradict itself, correct? If the sentence contradicted itself, it could only be believed as logically correct through faith.
Is this not right?
This set of statements is logically consistent-
God is an apple.
Apples are red.
Therefore God is red.
This set is not -
God is an apple.
God is red.
Therefore apples are red.
Logic is a tool for that kind of analysis. But it is observation, not logic that tells us some apples are green.
I thought logic was based on observation where faith is based on belief without observation.
Faith is certainly belief without proof (or observation). Maybe I'm being pedantic, but science is about observation and reasoning, where logic is just one of the reasoning methods. Fundamentally we're not disagreeing, but you're maybe using logic in a more colloquial and less technical sense than I am.
On the apple example. If no one told us apples are green and we had faith that they are only red as we were told, we would possibly deny logic that some apples are green when the logical observation challenges our previously taught faith. No?
Sure. I'm not denying any of that. My point is more about the difference between reason and logic. Reason can appeal to probability. Logic doesn't do that. Reason can talk about the properties of materials. Logic doesn't do that either. Reason deals with the world, logic with the words.
They say the Bible is proof of god.
They have faith that the Bible is the word of God.
They 'logically' reason that because the Bible is the word of God, then it must be true.
Correct me where my assumptions is wrong Para.
Faith came before logic.
lack of logical reasoning comes from hindsight faith.
I was told it is the word of god. I had faith that I would find god in the bible. I found god in the bible. The bible led me to the Jesus god. I have faith in god.
faith with the bible is illogical reasoning to those who possess faith in the bible and perhaps used to have faith in god but now have faith in the bible.
Faith could be irrational but not necessarily so (if you mean by “irrational” that which opposes or is the opposite of rationality). It's better to say that faith is "nonrational." Someone conducting an investigation using the process of induction does not necessarily come to the opposite conclusion of the person that is exercising faith. They might arrive at the same conclusion.
So, faith does not necessarily contradict reason. A person who is exercising faith can approach an investigation inductively. A person exercising reason at some point is using faith. There are some things that he has to "trust" while he’s employing reason.
they say when logic ends faith begins, it means when you cant answer questions anymore, you will succumbed to faith, it is easier that way, YAY, you dont need to think, you just believe....hmmmm I believe I can fly...
by Ron Karn6 years ago
Faith and trust in God are like the two elements of water - hydrogen and oxygen - you can't have water without both of them together. You can't be a Christian without having faith and trust together. ...
by marinealways246 years ago
Is your belief based on faith, logic, or both?Can a person be logical if they have an illogical belief or faith?
by marinealways246 years ago
Which Is More Limiting to the Mind? Faith or no faith?
by Kathryn L Hill2 years ago
...furthermore, He is behind the logical aspect of the world. In other words, He invented logic! We merely discovered / uncovered it!
by Brittany Williams2 years ago
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people,...
by sibtain bukhari3 years ago
There is no scientific and logical evidence of self existence of universe, therefore,only logical conclusion is the creator of universe not proving its self existence .
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.