I would say that it tends to depend on the person involved.
Something I find ironic, is that those who "buy into" faith, tend to be viewed as somehow "more gullible" than people who hold to reason.
Yet, for me, a gullible person is one who is willing to take what is easy to believe, as a truth, without question. What is "easy to believe" changes depending on the situation.
Not to mention the fact that "reasonable people" have to be satisfied with the answers they are given, or have found, regarding "the way things are".
That is to say that, if they are not acting on "faith" that reason works, then there has to be "evidence" that reason works, which means they accept that the answers that reason gives them for why things are, the way they are, are good, sound and "true" reasons.
Frankly, I have delved rather deeply into science and looked for the "reasonable" answers to things. At the moment, the very basis of scientific reasoning about how things function, is in question.
The very basis of scientific reasoning itself, is in question. Observation, for example, is problematic because we're still uncertain how much it contaminates, what is being observed.
The very nature of the relationship between time and space, is not fully understood. We still don't understand the fundamental connection between electricity, magnetism and gravity. How much does consciousness affect quantum collapse?
Yet, we confidently proclaim that we understand now how bees fly, how ice melts and the "reasonable" accept these answers not giving thought to the fact that the entire house of cards rests on a completely ambiguous and undefined understanding of the fundamental aspects of our reality.
How can one truly know "how bees fly" without understanding gravity?
Yet a "reasonable" person is willing to make the leap and not call this "faith".
Irony, have you no shame?
I believe that everyone takes more on "faith" than they are willing to admit. The ones who need to insist that they aren't basing their relation to reality on such, try to build a chain of "logic" from point D to point G to somehow validate what they are saying as "true", ignoring that they haven't the first clue what A, B, or C is, or they function.
Yet, this makes them "reasonable" and "less gullible"?
As far as the "we live and die" or "we live eternally" goes, there simply is no "reasonable" answer to this.
If I show you a box, do you assume the box is empty, assume it is full, or wait until it is opened to make an assessment?
The only assessments we can make about death, is from this side of it, in life. And since, from this side, it looks like it is simply an end, to all that we know or relate to on this side of it, we are going to have "fear" involved. We stress out simply moving from one place to live, to another. Or losing a place of employment. Compared to death, these could be considered "minor" adjustments, yet we freak out over these.
So, how can we relate to the biggest potential change of all, without fear playing a factor.? Which means that the "box" of what could be, is going to be colored heavily in favor of "being empty", because we have a hard time, in our imaginations, placing anything in this box that isn't something we relate to in our lives, right now.
In any event, as I see it, you might as well ask: "What is harder to buy into? The glass is half empty, or the glass is half full?"
It depends on the individual, what they want to believe and what experience in their life has influenced them to believe.
Peace.
2007-05-12 06:20:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Kevin G 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say in all cercumstances- it's Faith, that's harder to buy into because Reason always has evidence to prove itself and so we don't have to try that harder to convince ourselves or others. But depending on the proof, faith can always be challenged & that's why we call it "Faith" which in other words is a confident belief & also this is something which is entirely individualistic that's- we may be a strong believer or we may be a subtle one but we always do have a choice here whether to believe or not. But we can't say the same about reason simply because it has evidence- For example: An atheist can deny the existence of God & for that reason eternal life as well but he could never deny life and death itself simply because this is something he is literally experiencing- seeing, feeling & living with his entire being and these experiences are so profound that it almost makes it impossible to deny. So in a nutshell I would say it's faith that's always harder to buy into and probably that's the reason it's considered greater & I think perhaps that's why we're also given a "choice" here to do so out of our free will (that's exercising our conscience & reasoning) and not just out of any mere obligations.
.
2007-05-12 21:54:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by ♪Zodiac♫ 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Here is some reason foryou to think about it seems the more humans expand there knowledge of the universe and its workings the more we seem to find patterns and laws that govern the way things work not just some chaotic mess without logical explanation
so it is as if there is some grand design that we are uncovering and this design allows us exist and probe our existence with reason and logic yet the more we uncover this design the more we pat ourselves on the back and say hey aren't we clever, ever stop to wounder at how convenient it is that the universe seems to be a really intricate and that just a slight change here or there and the whole thing would never have came to be, hmm I guess the dice just rolled perfect and that's how the universe came to exist or maybe there is something more to it. I like what Einstein had to say about it all" god is subtle not malicious" If you want to attack faith attack its philosophy not its peoples beliefs,humans on either side of the fence can be ignorant, if you find fault with the morale lessons of a particular faith address that with sound logic not some vague statement about reason and faith you don't have faith because you don't see the logic then address the illogic of the principals of that faith. sory to say you cant just say that on one side is faith and then on the other is reason thats just not a sound aurgument
2007-05-12 11:49:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Without a doubt, Reason is much harder to buy into. It takes much more maturity to accept the universe as it is (regardless of your opinions) and accept the fact that there is knowledge out there that is beyond your grasp,
rather than fear that which you don't understand and go for the much more psychologically satisfying answer of "My personal God did it"
Reason is the observation of the universe by use of your senses. Faith is the psychological anthropomorphizing of the unknowns of the universe
2007-05-12 11:31:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I accept both and think both are useful and beneficial. Reason can be and often is faulty, but it is still an essential tool to use to find truth. However, since nothing can be empirically proved, only disproved, faith then can be used to decide what we will accept, believe and act upon. Once through faith we accept an idea or concept, we can continue to employ reason and empirical method to further question it and refine our understanding.
2007-05-12 11:30:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by jaicee 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the answer to this is completely subjective and dependant on one's own experience of life, death and religion.
Someone raised in a strict christian, catholic, muslim or jewish background will no doubt find it easier to accept that there is another realm after this one - if they are continually taught about it and given no reason to question it.
People raised in a non religous fashion who are encouraged to question the unquestionable will inherently be less inclined to simply accept that there is a life after this one.
From a personal point of view I can't really say, despite coming from a loosely religious childhood. Losing my mother recently has opened a mire of questions about my own mortality and as a result, I find myself drawn more to the aspect of faith - more for the reassurance that one day I may see her again.
Again, this is personal interpretation, just as it ought to be.
2007-05-12 11:33:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by gary_j_hay 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
We have faith in our Reason and think our Faith is reasonable.
It is hard to buy someone else's reason if we lack faith in their reasoning ability.
We however see reason in peoples faith because we all have experienced how faith can work wonders.
2007-05-12 12:51:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by smartobees 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well I consider Faith. because you know you are going to die, people do it all the time. Someone dies everyday. But faith is like having to believe in something you can't see or touch. Something that exist or may not.
2007-05-12 11:50:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by kissable kimmy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that reason is harder to "buy into" because it isn't all happy and good all the time. Plus, it is difficult to research something to figure out an answer that makes sense to you, compared to just taking someone else's word for it.
2007-05-12 11:26:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by its_victoria08 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Harder? If you're using your brain to make the determination, if you're using logic and rational thinking, then obviously reason is the hands-down winner. If you're using your emotions such as fear, confusion, yearning etc. then you're probably going to end up as a person of faith instead.
2007-05-12 11:22:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋