The Department of Philosophy hosted Lara Buchak, professor of philosophy at UC Berkeley, on March 3. Buchak presented her findings on the complex issue of whether faith can be considered rational.
Before tackling this question, Buchak explained why this topic is an important one to address as Christians and as people.
“First of all, faith is an important attitude both in religious and mundane contexts, so we need to be clear about what it is. Second, faith is often seen to conflict with ordinary standards of responding to the evidence. You can have faith or rational belief but not both. We want to figure out if this is correct.”
Buchak said Christians must first understand and define the meaning of faith before they can break down the question of rational faith.
“I claim that to have faith is to be willing to act without considering further evidence and to maintain that commitment in the face of counter evidence,” Buchak said. “What faith requires is stopping your search for additional evidence about the truth of a proposition and committing to a risky act on the basis of that proposition.”
Junior psychology major Miranda Murarik said Buchak’s discussion helped make the meaning of faith more tangible.
“[Buchak described faith] as being willing to act on something that you don’t have a lot of evidence in and also maintaining commitment in the face of [counter evidence]. I thought it was really great to see that example and potentially use it in my everyday life,” Murarik said.
However, Buchak said there is one caveat to this proposal. She said studying arguments or evidence for God’s existence does not mean that someone does not have faith.
“If you are looking for evidence for other purposes, for example, you want to figure out the arguments for and against God’s existence because you want to tell them to other people,” Buchak said. “Or you want to study theology because you want to figure out more about what God is like, then that still counts as faith. The test is whether you would make commitments on the basis of the proposition that God exists without seeing evidence.”
After explaining her definition of faith, Buchak addressed the question of whether faith is or can ever be rational.
Buchak argues that in order for it to be rational, it must meet certain criteria.
“Faith in this sense is going to be rational if two conditions are met: If you have a lot of evidence in the proposition in question already, and if your evidential situation is such that counter evidence won’t be conclusive,” Buchak said.
Daniel Cheng, a junior psychology major, said Buchak’s discussion impacted some of his biblical perspectives.
“If we accept [Buchak’s] method of faith and how it works, it really changes the way we look at faith and works within the Bible,” Cheng said. “It changes the future application to my faith.”
Buchak said her purpose was to present the data and argue the definition of faith.
“It would be nice if you were convinced that I was correct, but if you don’t end up thinking my account fits the data, that’s okay,” Buchak said. “Another thing I am doing is giving you the tools to argue about what the correct account is.”
In her conclusion, Buchak suggests people who lack faith miss opportunities.
“Why is faith rational? Because individuals who lack faith-because they insist on gathering all of the available evidence before acting-stand to miss out on great opportunities,” she said.