The Yin-Yang of Faith and Reason

As I continue my new apologetics course in ministry school, I realize that part of the reason I am put off by the particular approach in the book is because of my love for Miguel De Unamuno. Unamuno's book THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFE, is one of my favorite texts of all time and changed me as a person. In it Unamuno argues that there is a war in the human soul between faith and reason. He goes through a pretty detailed look at the substance of that war and builds a worldview from that context. Reason ends in despair and faith in skepticism, and from this dark place both work in tandem, through conflict and struggle, to build a picture of the world that is both believable and livable.

For Unamuno, the conflict must never end, for it is from this war that all genuine creativity comes, in both philosophy and religion. Faith defies reason, reason destroys faith, and from that endless struggle a true visions is born. I've found something like this to be true in my own life, and generally I try to keep the war going.

Bill Vallicella argues something similar over at Maverick Philosopher:
http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/athens-and-jerusalem/

What seems missing from my apologetics text is a recognition of this tension, of this war. "But", you may reply "you've spent a lot of time making the argument that faith is reasonable." Ah, yes, this is true. But the reason I use is admittedly (from the get-go) an uncertain reason, admitting of it's own shaky ground. I find the yin-yang symbol useful here. Within faith there is a touch of reason, and within reason there is a touch of faith. All reasoning need some ground of trust, and that trust in the end is itself 'groundless' in the sense of allowing no certainty. But philosophy and science seek to allow as little of this to enter as possible. Any philosopher of science KNOWS that something like faith is necessary to be able to talk about truth and knowledge, but they weed out as much as possible.

Faith cannot be in all ways unreasonable or irrational. But as I argued in CONVERSATIONAL THEOLOGY, some part of faith must be non-rational. It must go beyond what we know strictly by reason, well beyond. A faith, to be truly and honestly held, cannot be counter to what we know by science and philosophy, but it can move beyond it. A faith without any grounds is arbitrary, and our choice to follow God can never be arbitrary without loosing the ability to be honest, to make any claims to truth at all. Within my faith there is enough reason to build an actual vision or structure, but not enough to give certainty or security.

And on and on the war goes. Faith points to the trust in reason and says 'see, you do it to, Tu Quoque! Tu Quoque!" Reason points to the breadth of faith and says "you trust beyond the reasonable, in you there is no reason to believe." "Ah, but faith replies, there is reason, at least some reason, see I have it here." The war Unamuno saw was not as total as he thought, and he should've known this. For the connection he found in skepticism and despair stems from the inherent connection between faith and reason. These two forces at war are brother and sister, father and son, husband and wife. And from them, the very essence of 'me' is born.