One of the aspects of calculus that many students struggle with are limits. The point of the equations are to determine where the absolute constraints of a solution may be given a specific problem. Numerically speaking, these are fairly determinable. But what happens when you apply the same process to the idea of logic and life. What limits are constrained to the aspects of the human life or the human experience? What are the limits of the human imagination versus the capacity for human interaction? These have more absolute and arbitrary constraints than a math problem. The same is true of faith and reason; reason has specific boundaries and is limited to the bias of perception (next topic), while faith however carries far less constraints and the limits are determined by the object of faith.
Reason is typically subject to the concepts and constraints of laws or axioms (statements of truth). The whole process is to determine conclusions or the limits to natural problems by asserting certain objectives truths to come to optimal solutions or best outcomes. These typically rely on consistent performance, i.e., that things that tend to happen consistently in the past will perform consistently going into the future. Issues typically arise when either historically observed patterns don’t hold constant, or the bias of perception of the individual. People with more experience and a greater propensity to try new things tend to have a lower bias of perception that allows them to go further along the lines of reason than one who accepts more things as fixed truths, as their bias will limit what they are willing to do or try in order to obtain an optimal solution. For example, a physicist will come to a more broad opportunity set of how to explain space than a child or a school bus driver.
Faith on the other hand is a more subjective topic. It is conditioned on trust and usually relies on an object, entity or other group in order to attain a desired outcome. Faith is actually more common that most people state. I have faith that my steak will taste like the steaks I have had in the past; yet if I had COVID, the steak might not taste like anything at all and my faith in my sensory perception would have been misguided. The same thing is true with relationships. If I have faith in my family, my job, my church, etc., I will believe they have the capacity or propensity to perform in a certain manner. When things deviate from that path, the loss of faith can create all sorts of issues, typically stemming from a bias of selfishness.
Reason, by nature, has specific and absolute boundaries, while faith can have unlimited boundaries depending on what you have faith in. If one has an actual faith in God, the absolute limits are boundless, yet many struggle to get to that point since they constrain their perception of faith to human logic. Yet if one was to truly anchor in the freedom that Christ spoke of; one might realize that reason and logic posits a system of control that governs someone, especially those that claim to be free and are yet slaves to their own vices and sins. While that may seem confusing at first glance, I will address the paradox and curse of the law, which should enlighten someone to how they are subject to external controls even when they perceive that they are actually free. One must be truly bound in faith to an infinite source to truly experience freedom, which is why faith and reason pronounce a paradox which many struggle with in their faith journey. And the modern day concept of a church does nothing to help people understand what Christ really taught.
As Morpheus in the Matrix told Neo, “You’re a slave Neo. Your mind is in a prison.” And the only way to escape a prison is to realize you are trapped in one.
