I have intended for the past week or so to write on faith. In fact, I have several drafts sitting in wordpress. Why the focus on faith? Perhaps because there is no term more overused and yet thoroughly confused than this. I’m sure there are others, but this one is particularly so because it sits on the fence between philosophy and theology. It isn’t a word to be defined purely within the closed system of theology and, at the same time, cannot be adequately described by philosophical reflection. It sits on this fence because it is the means by which some sort of epistemological justification is conferred upon a belief. The real confusion occurs when one examines whether faith is a hopeful leap into the void or some sort of trust based on relational and evidential reasoning. In the former case it may be clear to some that this is not too different that unjustified belief. This is what I’ve typically referred to as mere opinion. A hopeful leap implies that there is no adequate justification for belief. As we all remember, this justification is part and parcel of how we measure whether the beliefs in our minds should be considered knowledge. The latter case is equally confusing because we seem to be using the word faith in place of justified belief. Upon closer examination, however, some may realize that this faith/justified belief doesn’t quite behave the same. There are some question begging scenarios and circularities that surface. Of course, it is no help that many philosopher/theologian types dodge the issue completely or speak so abstractly as to be meaningless. And before too many of you get crazy about this process of defining a “religious construction”, keep in mind that we do this quite often with to describe other cognitive activities which are not specifically religious. So, there is the problem and the reason for the long delay. Hopefully these ideas and arguments will coelesce sometime soon and result in a more refined and precise post.