Faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing,

or a belief that is not based on proof.[1][2] Faith is in general the persuasion of the mind that a
certain statement is true,[3] belief in and assent to the truth of what is declared by another, based
on his or her supposed authority and truthfulness.[4]

Religious faith in a theological context is a confident belief in a transcendent reality, a religious

teacher, a set of teachings or a Supreme Being. Thus, religious faith disqualifies reasoning in
favor of "transcendent reality". However, atheists and agnostics generally consider religious faith
to be simply superstition.

Since faith implies a trusting reliance upon future events or outcomes, it is often taken by some
people as inevitably synonymous with a belief "not resting on logical proof or material
evidence."[5][6]

Informal usage of the word faith can be quite broad, and the word is often used as a mere
substitute for trust or belief. The English word is thought to date from 1200–50, from the Latin
fidem or fidēs, meaning trust, derived from the verb fīdere, to trust.[1]

[edit] Epistemological validity of faith

There exists a wide spectrum of opinion with respect to the epistemological validity of faith. On
one extreme is logical positivism, which denies the validity of any beliefs held by faith; on the
other extreme is fideism, which holds that true belief can only arise from faith, because reason
and evidence cannot lead to truth. Some foundationalists, such as St. Augustine of Hippo and
Alvin Plantinga, hold that all of our beliefs rest ultimately on beliefs accepted by faith. Others,
such as C.S. Lewis, hold that faith is merely the virtue by which we hold to our reasoned ideas,
despite moods to the contrary.[7]

William James was thinking that the varieties of religious experiences should be sought by
psychologists, because they represent the closest thing to a microscope of the mind—that is, they
show us in drastically enlarged form the normal processes of things. For a useful interpretation of
human reality, to share faith experience he said that we must each make certain "over-beliefs" in
things which, while they cannot be proven on the basis of experience, help us to live fuller and
better lives.

Some rationalists criticize religious faith arguing its irrationality, and see faith as ignorance of
reality: a strong belief in something with no evidence and sometimes a strong belief in something
even with evidence against it. Bertrand Russell noted, "Where there is evidence, no one speaks
of 'faith'. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only
speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence."[29]

Rationalists may become alarmed that faithful activists, perhaps with extreme beliefs, might not
be amenable to argument or to negotiation over their credulous behavior.
In the rationalist view, belief should be restricted to what is directly supportable by logic or
scientific evidence.[30] Robert Todd Carroll, an advocate of atheism, argues that the word "faith"
is usually used to refer to belief in a proposition that is not supported by a perceived majority of
evidence. Since many beliefs are in propositions that are supported by a perceived majority of
evidence, the claim that all beliefs/knowledge are based on faith is a misconception "or perhaps
it is an intentional attempt at disinformation and obscurantism" made by religious apologists:

There seems to be something profoundly deceptive and misleading about lumping together as
acts of faith such things as belief in the Virgin birth and belief in the existence of an external
world or in the principle of contradiction. Such a view trivializes religious faith by putting all
non-empirical claims in the same category as religious faith. In fact, religious faith should be put
in the same category as belief in superstitions, fairy tales, and delusions of all varieties.[31]
—Robert T. Carroll

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins contends that faith is merely belief without evidence; a
process of active non-thinking. He states that it is a practice which only degrades our
understanding of the natural world by allowing anyone to make a claim about reality that is
based solely off of their personal thoughts, and possibly distorted perceptions, that does not
require testing against nature, has no ability to make reliable and consistent predictions, and is
not subject to peer review.[32]

harmonist

When reason serves revelation it finds its proper place as an aspect of faith. As an aspect of faith
reason is most useful and beautiful. It becomes a tool of the soul rather than its betrayer.

In what sense is reason an aspect of faith? Is not faith that which those lacking reason resort to?
Such questions betray a superficial understanding of the nature of faith. Faith fully understood
amounts to conformity to truth, whereas rational thought is but an imperfect means of
apprehending truth. Conforming to truth involves apprehending or understanding it theoretically,
but theoretically understanding truth does not necessarily involve conforming to it.

As Karen Armstrong points out, the Latin word credo derives from cordare: to give one’s heart,
to commit oneself. Such commitment fosters understanding of something that intellectual fence-
sitting cannot. It is with a similar understanding of faith (sraddha) that Thakura Bhaktivinoda
equates it with surrender (saranagati), as does Sri Krishna in the Gita, when having awakened
Arjuna’s faith in bhakti‘s efficacy he tells him that the practical application of his faith is
surrender.

The world above and within, which includes within its circle the world below and without,
represents itself before us symbolically. Its symbols, its myths are no more facts that one must
blindly believe in than they are tales that need to be empirically proved before one proceeds to
embrace them. Mythos is not logos but neither is it irrational to embrace the mythic and symbolic
in the pursuit of knowing that which logos can never reveal. Nor is it logical to dispense with
mythos altogether in the name of logos.

The fact that faith in its embrace of the symbolic is transrational—that it involves experience
beyond that which is possible through rational thought alone—does not imply that it itself is
irrational. Faith for good reason arises out of the mystery that underlies the very structure and
nature of reality, a mystery that in its entirety will never be entirely demystified despite what
those who have placed reason on their altar might like us to believe. The mystery of life that
gives rise to faith as a supra-rational means of unlocking life’s mystery—one that reason does
not hold the key to—suggests that faith is fundamentally rational in that it is a logical response to
the mysterious. When faced with the great unknown we must find reason to trust.

But are we sure that reason does not have the potential to demystify life, rendering it static,
meaningless, and boring? If faith has an influence in our lives, should we not be able to measure
it? But can we even measure a simple line any more than in a pragmatic working sense, which
has value only in terms of accomplishing a task? Can we measure what a line is?

Timothy Scott argues that if we try to understand a line as the sum of its points, we must start at
one of its point and begin our measurement from there. From the starting point of our
measurement a second point is considered in relation to the first point. However, as soon as the
measurer moves to the second point on the line, the relationship between the original point and
the second point  point changes in that it now lacks the element of measurer’s direct experience
of it. The two points can be understood in relation to one another, but their relationship differs
when observed from either point. At the same time, as Meister Eckhart has pointed out, a point
itself does not have a quality of magnitude and thus does not lengthen the line of which it is the
principle. Thus by mathematical measurement we can only arrive at a subjective approximation
of the nature of the line we are measuring, and after all, the Sanskrit word “maya,” often
translated as “illusion,” also means “to measure.”

Need we measure faith in order to believe in its revelatory potential? Better to question our faith
in reasoning and empiricism in terms of their capacity to arrive at comprehensive knowing. This
is especially so when, left to themselves, the knowing they could provide, if it were
comprehensive, would take the mystery out of life. Faith on the other hand affirms life’s
mysterious nature. If faith is the giving of one’s heart, it has much to do with love, in the absence
of which reason alone does not qualify as a substitute.

“Scepticism is the beginning of Faith.”—oscar wilde

“Faith means belief in something concerning which doubt is theoretically possible”- William james
“Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason has once accepted in spite of your changing moods”-
c.s.lewis

Faith is a passionate intuition.  ~William Wordsworth

Faith is the bird that sings when the dawn is still dark.  ~Rabindranath Tagore

Faith... must be enforced by reason.... When faith becomes blind it dies.  ~Mahatma Gandhi

Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.  ~Martin Luther King
Jr.

He wears his faith but as the fashion of his hat.- William shakespeare