Part 1 C: True, Healthy, Faith

           The third possibility for faith is that faith is substantial, it has meaning; there is a good reason to have ones faith.  It is also faith because at this time the thing believed cannot be proven in an ultimate sense or empirical sense.   A great example of this is getting up every morning and going to work.  Each time we go to work we know that the end result will be a pay check in a week or two, a month or quarterly.  The worker puts the work in believing that they will be rewarded for holding up their end of the commitment.  This is faith with substance but not having been fully proven at the time.  What if the company goes bankrupt?  What if the owner/CEO, whoever, is a crook and decides to skip town with all the assets? These things do not typically happen but do happen once in a while.  

 Another example is the belief that every time we are not with our significant other they are faithful to us. But before I go into this example let me state that each example listed though out the series (Part 1 A: Is blind faith the answer; Part 1 B: Is empirical evidence the answer to our faith) could be blind faith, or genuine substance based faith depending on the circumstances.  

If each time  husband #1 left his house he came home to his wife hosting another man, the husband would have blind faith if he believed the rest of his life his wife was faithful (he’s also dealing with cognitive dissonance).   If, however, husband #2  comes home from work to find his wife is taking care of things that need to be done for the family.  Throughout the day he and she talk during their breaks. If they had a good relationship, kept open lines of communication, genuinely worked hard on their marriage the husbands faith is merited based on the definition in the introduction: (Faith is the substance of things hoped for without having seen the full evidence realized).  There is no way to know with absolute certainty that either spouse is cheating or not cheating.  But one husband has more reason to believe in their spouse then the other.  This is true substance based faith.  It is not like the sun coming up tomorrow faith, because we know that it always will until it does not and then it really does not matter, because we won't be here. This is the type of faith that takes time, research, logical inquiry etc... to come to.  This is real faith.  

This real faith is not blind belief, nor does it require empirical proof that cannot ever be known.  It is substantial, logical and effective faith.  How could you know with absolute certainty that your spouse never cheated unless your kept him/her locked up?  How can you know with absolute certainty that God does or does not exist without dieing and finding out?  There are those who say they have relationship with God, but that does not help the atheist who believes there is no god.

If we as the human race are to be real with ourselves we must first recognize that we are faith based creatures.  After having acknowledged this principal fact we must be open to scrutinizing our faith, which allows us to become cognitively consonant when pursuing where to place faith. 

Most of the time people are unwilling to do this because their very foundations will be shaken.  Many religious people are unwilling to become cognitively consonant because they believe that if they look at the scientific evidence they will have to change what they believe.  Many atheists are unwilling to look at the possibility of a supernatural creator because that leaves open the possibility that all testable truth can be construed as falsehood.  In the desire to protect the value to his life’s work the atheist makes a leap of faith into naturalism as being the only possible answer to the universe and origin of life.  I will dedicate some time to each side, exploring these ideas further.

Faith is a powerful part of our lives if it is utilized properly.  How does anyone know whether or not they are putting their faith in the right things?  What happens if there is new information that causes us to question our choice?  How can we know what to put our faith in when everyone seems to believe something different?  Should faith be determined by what is contemporary?  Should it be based in something from antiquity?  

The exploration of these questions and many more is the purpose of this work; it is not designed to tell people where they should put their faith.  It is not designed to preach one thing over another, be it one religion over another or one academic discipline over another (such as philosophy or religion or science).  

Another purpose is to get people thinking for themselves.  My students hear from the first day we meet each semester to the last, “don’t take my word on anything, and don’t take another man’s word either.  You do your own thinking and your own research that way you are informed and come up with the conclusions that seem most logical to you.”    

This of course is more complicated than doing a Google search.  It takes time and exploration.  Are such matters worth it?  Most of us choose a spouse (hopefully for a life time).  Isn’t it worth the time and energy to explore that person before making a commitment of faith in them and towards them?   We put politicians in office believing they are going to do what we elected them to do (typically we have blind faith in them unfortunately).  Isn’t figuring out our faith’s foundation worth a little time and effort?  Is it not worth figuring out whether it makes more sense to put our faith in a God or in atheism?

              Being cognitively consonant is a huge step toward true peace and confidence.  Knowing in what and whom one believes brings the individual to a better understanding of himself and the world around him.  That person can answer with conviction “I know where my faith is.”  The next step is making sure that where we put our faith is logical and reasonable.  If one believes that a peanut is god and knows it and is content believing it, that individual is not using their reason.