Appeal to Faith (Argument from Faith)
Harrison criticizes using faith as a substitute for evidence about factual claims. His central challenge is how such a method could distinguish one unsupported claim from a contradictory one.
THE IDEA
EVIDENCE? WE DON’T NEED NO STINKING EVIDENCE!
Consider it a warning sign whenever someone downplays the need for evidence and insists that it’s unnecessary. “Faith is enough,” is a common claim. When you hear this, immediately go to DEFCON 2, signal red alert, and raise shields. When they say, “Just trust me,” it’s time to throttle up the skepticism and man your battle stations. Relying on faith might sound sweet and sensible to some ears because it’s heavily promoted as something positive and reliable. But the truth is that faith is really nothing more than pretending to know something that you don’t know. It’s worse than bad thinking; it’s antithinking. Faith as a means to figuring things out, coming to a conclusion, and justifying a position on something is the opposite of thinking like a scientist. It’s a terrible way to make your way through life because it can lead you to believe just about anything.
The crucial problem for those who say faith is an acceptable way of approaching unusual claims is figuring out where to draw the line. When exactly are we supposed to rely on faith instead of thinking? If I decide to have faith and accept the claims of some astrologer or doomsday prophet, should I also have faith and accept claims that gargoyles and fairies are real? Should I use faith to believe in mediums who say they talk to dead people, even though they can’t prove it? What’s the difference? If blind trust works for one thing, why not for everything?
When to use it
When evaluating a new medical treatment that lacks clinical trials but has testimonials based on faith.
During a debate about the existence of supernatural beings, where one side avoids evidence by appealing to faith.
When making a personal decision that affects others, such as choosing a leader or policy based on trust rather than facts.
In a classroom setting when a student argues that a historical event must be true because 'it's a matter of faith'.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Faith healing claims
A person claims that faith alone can cure a serious illness, dismissing the need for medical evidence or scientific trials.
Astrology acceptance
Someone asks you to accept an astrological prediction on faith and dismisses requests for evidence. The appeal supplies no way to test whether that prediction is accurate.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Think of a time when you accepted a claim based solely on faith. What evidence could have changed your mind?
How would you respond to someone who says 'Just trust me' without providing any justification?
If faith is used to justify one supernatural belief, why wouldn't it justify all contradictory supernatural beliefs?
Often confused with
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Think (Guy P. Harrison)