Billions of people across the globe embrace beliefs not based upon reason or evidence, but based upon faith. By doing this, faith is committed to an epistemology. This way one can draw conclusions about things and make declarations such as "I know God exists by faith". But let's not isolate this to mere god beliefs, this applies to any faith position. These would include paranormal claims, such as psychics or mediums, ghosts, or even those whom believe there are unicorns on Pluto. Definitions are in order here and since definitions are arbitrary, they are granted what is known as a priori true status which is to say that any definition is a *true* premise. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche quipped "Faith is not wanting to know what is true", I've attempted to use the Biblical notion of it without the allusions or poetry. 

Faith - Belief in something one cannot observe or reasonably conclude. 

Reasonable - Having sound reasoning. 

P1) Reasonable implies having sound reasoning.  (R → SR) [definition, a priori]

P2) Faith is absent sound reasoning. (⌐SR)[definition, a priori]

C) Therefore faith cannot be said to be reasonable. (⌐R) [modus tollens]

A very basic syllogism to demonstrate the falsity of the claim that "Faith is Reasonable" given that you embrace these definitions. If you think I've been uncharitable to faith, proctor a definition you think sufficiently describes faith as well as any arguments you think support the idea that faith is reasonable.

What say you, VgChartz, is this faith thing reasonable?

EDIT: *sound* reasoning entails that it not only follows proper form (valid) but the premises of the argument are actually true.

I'd say the problems lie in your definitions, as...well, really, I can't find anything that supports a definition of faith as "Belief in something one cannot observe or reasonably conclude."

According to Merriam Webster, faith is merely "firm belief in something for which there is no proof," with other dictionaries having similar definitions. In other words, faith extends to anything that you cannot demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt. I have faith, for instance (totally hypothetical, no one try to use this on the NFL thread), that Kansas City will win tomorrow's playoff game. I have plenty of reasons as to why I think this, such as Houston generally sucking and KC's defense being set up almost specifically to foil Houston's offense. I am quite confident in KC winning, and I would argue it's a very reasonable belief, but in the end, it is still something I cannot prove, therefore it is faith.

So, no, faith does not imply a lack of reasonability. Certain beliefs that you may have faith in might be unreasonable, but as a whole concept, no.

EDIT: As a side note, if you leave the definition faith as is, then there's hardly a debate to be had, as you've simply created a tautology. Reasonability requires...well, reason, and if faith is, by definition, absent of reason, then obviously it must be unreasonable.

Define having sound.

This shouldn't be political.

99% of conservatives are die-hard Christians. They still think evolution is a "myth". They also think that anything in the Bible means it's true.

99% of liberals won't even give a response. They'll call you racist(even though religion has nothing to do with race). They also have a funny idea of what freedom of speech is. They can criticize everything they want, yet they'll cry that they're being harassed if someone says one word against them.


Leave this to scientists(and real ones. Not those idiot creationists in the south that claim to be "professionals"). When scientists debate, there usually isn't any bias or feelings brought into the argument. It can create great arguments that'll usually find an answer(even if it isn't clear).

That question is an oxymoron ...

He's using the "begging for the question" fallacy. whether faith is unreasonable or not isn't relevant in this post. Why? Because the OP is extremely biased. They didn't even hide it from their post. Here's my bet on how the conversation will end though-

A person will say they're Christian or whatnot, the OP(or someone else) will call them an idiot, preach Atheism(in the name of Richard Dawkins!), and force him to read quotes from "Origin of Species".

(Hopefully you'll sense the sarcasm in the last half of the previous sentence.)

In general, no.

Belief in a god is absolute fantasy. But i can understand that reality is difficult to accept. To want to believe, even though you know its unlikely, but that is what you hope for, is a reason.

But, that is personal belief. All religions are schemes made by humans and they don't reflect the existance of any god at all.

I've read and seen some things regarding quantum physics that suggest everything stems from our thoughts. I'm not a quantum physicist but I am of the belief that of the many plausible outcomes that can be.. the outcome you concentrate on most will be. Maybe that's unreasonable to a lot of people. But it makes sense to me. 

Let's say for an example, you like a company, and you have a unwavering faith (and a plausible chance) that you will get a job there. Then your thoughts are going to create that reality. Were as if you have tremendous doubt then your thought will create that reality. 

Faith is the surrender of the mind. Yes, and sometimes that is a very blessed thing. Or a dangerous thing depending on it's usage in matters plausible and not plausible.

No. Faith is by definition unreasonable, at least as we use it in the religious sense. Faith is belief that goes beyond the available evidence.

In the case of religion where there is no positive evidence, faith is completely irrational and unreasonable.

Tell me one thing. If you know something, then how can you believe it. Believing something is completely different then knowing it. If this world really is a test to test our beliefs, then what would be the point of God revealing himself to is. Then we would not need to belief, we will know and hence the entire point of testing us would be nullified. God, if he exists, can not be perceived by us as he has made us this way. It's like how we can not percieve 4 dimensional or 5 dimensional beings. We have our limitations.