Chapter 1: Understanding Faith in Contemporary Society

The term 'faith' carries significant weight today, often becoming entangled in a binary classification that pervades our discussions. In Western contexts, individuals who hold faith are typically viewed as religious, while skeptics are labeled "non-believers," emphasizing reason over faith. This dichotomy creates a substantial divide that many consider insurmountable.

However, this perception is regrettable, as faith is intrinsic to nearly every aspect of our existence. The future remains uncertain for everyone, meaning that simply living constitutes an act of faith. Those who attempt or complete suicide often do so because they have lost hope in what lies ahead. Similarly, the dissolution of a marriage signifies a significant erosion of faith for at least one, if not both, partners.

Investing in higher education is another example of faith in action; individuals believe that earning a degree will enhance their lives, even though they cannot guarantee this outcome in advance. Once they obtain their degrees, it becomes impossible to ascertain whether their lives would have been better without that investment. We must rely on statistical evidence that supports the idea that education is generally beneficial, as we cannot predict individual circumstances.

Prominent physicist Max Planck articulated the relationship between science and faith, stating:

"Anyone who has seriously engaged in scientific work recognizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are inscribed the words: Ye must have faith. It is a quality which the scientist cannot dispense with. Science cannot unravel the ultimate mystery of nature. This is because, in the end, we ourselves are part of nature and thus part of the mystery we seek to understand."

In contrast, Richard Dawkins offers a different perspective, claiming that "faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence." While he acknowledges the potential for blind faith, he misses the point that faith can coexist with reason and careful consideration. After thorough evaluation, questions will persist, and it is in these moments that we must rely on faith to bridge the gap between what we know and what remains uncertain.

This process of making decisions based on probabilities sets faith apart from aimless conjecture. A contemporary example of this interplay between reason and faith is climate change.

Climate change gained significant public attention in the 1970s and 80s, when scientists, including James Hansen from NASA, began to warn that increasing greenhouse gas emissions could result in severe global warming unless we acted swiftly. Although they could forecast likely impacts based on available scientific data, there was no absolute certainty regarding the accuracy of their models. They argued that the existing evidence indicated a significant risk, advocating for caution and proactive measures.

Conversely, the fossil fuel industry often emphasized the uncertainties surrounding climate science, overstating these ambiguities to preserve the status quo and avoid costly regulations. This strategy was aided by a public that generally lacked understanding of the scientific method and the role of probability in complex systems. Consequently, disclaimers from scientists following extreme weather events only fueled skepticism about climate change.

The fossil fuel industry did more than undermine faith in climate science; it also eroded trust in the scientific method and scientists themselves. The prevailing narrative that science is solely evidence-based, with no role for faith, played right into the industry's hands.

Both fundamentalism and radical materialism adhere to a rigid, linear understanding of truth, despite emerging from opposing ends of a rich belief spectrum. Both positions are absolutist and intolerant, asserting themselves as the sole authority. However, neither fundamentalist religious views nor dogmatic scientific materialism does justice to faith, knowledge, or the complexity of human experience.

Literalism, whether from a religious or materialist perspective, rejects the possibility of paradox—where two opposing truths can coexist. It treats paradox as an issue to be resolved rather than a concept to be explored. This approach also dismisses probabilistic or contingent views of reality, overlooking truths best expressed through metaphor. In a culture that prioritizes certainty, neither spirituality nor science can flourish.

In 1931, mathematician Kurt Gödel introduced his incompleteness theorems, which have profound implications for our understanding of truth. As summarized in Rebecca Goldstein's biography of Gödel, these theorems state that:

"In any formal system adequate for number theory, there exists an undecidable formula—a statement that is neither provable nor disprovable."

Moreover, Gödel's second theorem reveals that the consistency of such a formal system cannot be validated within that same system.

These mathematical insights may seem irrelevant to discussions of faith, but their implications for our conception of truth are crucial. Gödel's first theorem suggests that even within systems that yield self-evidently true statements, there will always be elements that remain unprovable.

Gödel asserted that he believed only in a priori truths, yet he acknowledged that pure reasoning could not yield ultimate truths that are provable or disprovable within the same framework.

This leads to Gödel's second theorem, which echoes criticisms of fundamentalists by atheists: they cannot use their sacred texts as evidence for the truth of their beliefs. Proof of a text's factual accuracy must come from outside the religious context. Similarly, the scientific method cannot be used to validate itself, a fact that highlights the necessity of faith in any worldview, regardless of its epistemological foundations.

Gödel was not advocating for postmodern claims that deny the existence of truth. Rather, he was among many thinkers whose ideas challenge traditional views on truth. The uncertainty principle and the dual nature of light in quantum physics further illustrate the inadequacy of a strictly binary approach to truth.

What about those engaged in the "soft sciences," such as the humanities, philosophy, and theology? Their work also reflects the enduring significance of faith, even if they do not always explicitly label it as such.

Notable 20th and 21st-century scholars advocating for an evolved understanding of faith include Hannah Arendt, Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Iain McGilchrist, and Jennifer Hecht. This list is by no means exhaustive, but these thinkers resonate with my perspective.

In "The Life of the Mind," Arendt articulates:

"Analogies, metaphors, and emblems are the threads by which the mind holds on to the world even when, absentmindedly, it has lost direct contact with it, and they guarantee the unity of human experience."

Both Jung and Campbell emphasized the centrality of metaphor in human experience, suggesting that spirituality, when properly understood, is an experiential engagement with a metaphor that points to a deeper truth. Jesus intuitively grasped this through his parables, where the moral wisdom conveyed is more significant than the literal truth of the narrative.

In his final conversation with Bill Moyers for the PBS series "The Power of Myth," Campbell made this poignant exchange:

Moyers: "But if God is the god we have only imagined, how can we stand in awe of our own creation?"

Campbell: "How can we be terrified by a dream? You have to break past your image of God to get through to the connoted illumination. The psychologist Jung has a relevant saying: 'Religion is a defense against the experience of God.'"

The emphasis on concepts and ideas can diminish the transcendent experience of mystery, which many consider the ultimate religious encounter.

Historian and atheist Jennifer Hecht, in her discussion of her book "Doubt: A History," articulates that even for those who do not believe in deities, experiences often associated with spirituality should not be dismissed. Hecht asserts, "We are living in a world that loves to take away the amazing. But explaining it away doesn't explain it…I believe human experience to be as important as the cosmic universe. The human experience is where we live and in here [the body], meaning exists."

Hecht and others advocate for what I term a kind of Humanist spirituality. I propose that we embrace our capacity for suspending disbelief concerning religious questions—rather than simply believing or disbelieving. We should not sacrifice the idea of faith at the altar of reason, just as we should not compromise reason at the altar of faith. Together, they can foster the wisdom and hope we urgently need to confront the challenges ahead.

Increasingly, we are viewing faith as a static entity, rather than as a dynamic process. This perception stifles its ability to adapt to new information and circumstances.

Moreover, by confining the discussion of faith to a narrow interpretation of religious belief, we risk discarding faith altogether. We have not simply replaced traditional religious faith with faith in science or reason; rather, we have abandoned faith entirely, treating the notion of meaning beyond ourselves as an outdated luxury in the modern world.

This shift has given rise to nihilistic movements such as QAnon and widespread skepticism towards vaccines designed to protect us from modern pandemics—demonstrating how faith has been supplanted by absurdity and destructiveness. Many now struggle to trust even verified election outcomes, let alone historical achievements like lunar landings or the efficacy of vaccines.

Ultimately, a species that has lost faith in itself is unlikely to muster the courage needed to tackle pressing issues such as climate change and inequality. Faith thrives on imagination, embodying what we perceive as possible and the ineffable. In an increasingly polarized world, where literal thinking clashes with absurdity, we must create space for faith and its potential to guide us through uncertainty.

Chapter 2: The Role of Faith and Reason in Addressing Challenges

This video features Lisabeth During presenting "The Chastity Plot," with Simon Critchley, discussing the complex relationship between faith, reason, and modern societal challenges.