Why Reason Isn’t Enough

How far can reason take us? Whether we’ve ever asked this specific question, most people assume an answer to it in their thoughts, discussions, and arguments.

In The Evidence for Virtue: Social Science, Natural Law, and Human Flourishing, political scientist Paul Miller argues that Christians need not be fearful about the use of social science. He says, “[I]t provides a way to talk normatively about human flourishing in terms that are intelligible, legitimate, and persuasive to those outside the community of faith.” In other words, believers can make use of the tools and practices that sociologists use to understand and describe society, so that they can better present and defend moral claims in the public square.

Miller’s basic argument is correct in asserting that many Christians appeal to studies and statistics to justify some of the moral beliefs they hold. This is true even though most Christians initially derive their views from Scripture, or else from historic church teachings, and not by surveying the latest findings of social scientists. Even so, how far can such data take us?

Yet an even more fundamental issue lingers behind these questions. Certainly reason is required to evaluate the data gleaned from social science. But reason proves to be necessary elsewhere: namely, in our relationships with other believers. So how should we understand the function and use of reason in the context of the family of God?

Although many books have been published in recent years about how Christians should address public life, public square issues,[1] insufficient attention is given to the nature of reasoned discourse among Christians. When we attend to this important subject, we discover that reason requires virtue to produce faithful discussion and understanding.

Reasonable Faith?

When we consider the usefulness or reliability of the social sciences, we arrive at two related but distinct issues: the validity of natural law and the nature of reason. These two hang together in the course of debate, and so both deserve some attention.

Natural law is undoubtedly a contested subject among Christians and non-Christians alike. By it we mean the belief that moral norms (rights and wrongs) can be discerned through careful reflection on the natural order. We need not wade into that debate here, but the lines are typically drawn according to those who follow Augustine and those in the Reformed tradition, versus the followers of Thomas Aquinas and the broader Catholic tradition. These sketches aside, all manner of positions exist along the spectrum of Christian belief about whether natural law can help us practice theology. Regardless of where one lands on this spectrum, all positions operate according to some idea about how human reason works and how extensive the impact of depravity is upon the mind.

Reason can be thought of as that God-given capacity to think, reflect, and discern the nature of things. This would include our ability to infer, deduce, and draw conclusions.[2] Essentially, reason is an organ used in the pursuit of knowledge (not so much through the application of our senses, though these are involved), but through a higher order of mental activity. Some would contest the limitations of this definition, but most would acknowledge that it entails its basic sense at least.

Because Christians believe reason is a God-given capacity, we expect that it will move us in the right direction in discussions among believers. However, many Christians often hold to a diversity of opinions on many things. How then does our own inability to persuade others sometimes help us think more constructively about how reason should work?

Faithful Reason

Faithful reason is holistic in nature. The features with which God has endowed human beings were intended to function in concert with one another so that we might accurately reflect His image to the watching world. We shouldn’t think of our emotions as one thing, and our thought life as another. We don’t assume character is one area of concern, while our conduct is another. Neither do we want to divorce reason from confidence in Jesus Christ. Sound reason serves our renewed humanity (Col. 3:10).

Scripture holds reason and morality together. First, Romans 12:1-2 tells us to be living sacrifices unto God. We shouldn’t be conformed to this world, but transformed by the renewal of our minds. These verses are helpful because they link renewal of the mind with moral transformation, and worship, or “reasonable service.” The Greek behind this latter phrase is logikos, which implies something that is well-ordered and even rational. Reason is not so much a specialized method of knowing, but a way in which worshippers of Jesus Christ reflect their commitment to discern God’s will, which includes that which is true, good, acceptable, and excellent.

The oft-neglected verses that follow 12:1-2 are a second important passage. In verses 3-8, the apostle Paul urges Christians to exercise sober judgment (humility, in essence) by remembering our interdependence in the body of Christ. The one body has many members, and these parts are not the same. Therefore, the faithful person discerns these distinctions, and exercises the gifts of grace they have received. The chapter concludes with verses 9-21, which show how love enables Christians us to deal with both our fellow brethren, and even our enemies.

What do these passages indicate about the nature of reason and Christian discussion? At least two principles follow.

(1) Reason Needs Humility

It is easy in the heat of debate to forget our limitations as human beings. Because the immediate goal is often winning the debate as opposed to discovering the truth, we shy away from the concession that we are finite. We preach and teach our Creator’s omniscience, but we seldom spend much time on the inverse truth: Creatures are not omniscient. This is not the same as saying that our reasoning never gets us to the truth! Yet faithful reason among Christians means we strive to recognize our limitations.

Paul’s comments in Romans 12 (and other places) about spiritual gifts are a timely reminder of the need for humility. We are always tempted to esteem ourselves more highly than we ought. This is why Christ’s condescension and incarnation deserve as much attention in the church as do His crucifixion and resurrection. Only by recognizing our brokenness and neediness, as well as the generosity of Christ’s incarnation and the Spirit’s dispensation of gifts, can we maintain the humility needed for fruitful discussions among God’s family.

(2) Reason Needs Love

Because love is often reduced to mere feeling, love seems to be a hindrance to objectivity, which sound reason is believed by some to require. Even though biblical Christianity rejects this error concerning love, certainly emotions are involved with authentic love. Sometimes people have mistakenly assumed that caring about the object of discussion requires us to suspend reason, or at worst that our reasoning on that particular subject is automatically suspect. Yet I’m afraid we’ve often equated being unbiased with being emotionally detached. However, this is an assumption that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

A good everyday example of this is the parent who, though they hate to discipline, chooses to exercise it toward their wayward child. Though momentary emotions may tempt them to withhold it, reasoning from the Scriptures causes them to perform it (cf. Heb. 12:4-12).

The fact that we have any kind of spirited debate demonstrates that people are deeply invested in the outcome of discussions. The difference for Christians is this: if we are truth-lovers (1 Jn. 3:18), and if we love our Christian brothers and sisters (1 Jn. 4:7), then we will follow where faithful reason leads us. We put carnal feelings on hold in order to allow godly passion and faithful reason to seek the truth.

Paul addresses this in 1 Corinthians 13. There he explains that we are nothing without love. Christians are reminded again that reason goes hand-in-hand with charity. “If I . . . understand all mysteries and all knowledge,” as Paul puts it, “but have not love, I am nothing.” Faithful reason must be seen as a servant to truth and other people, not a tool of self-promotion or aggressive coercion. But it can only function in this way when it is joined to the virtue of love, which orders our reason.[3]

Conclusion

It is essential that Christians prepare for apologetic encounters with unbelievers. They should also form a theologically faithfully understanding of the proper application of social science to moral reflection. But what must precede and accompany these tasks is learning to reason well within our own community of faith. If we lack the virtues needed to discuss, debate, and even disagree, then we will likely find it more difficult to engage others who do not share the same core commitments as those within the church. Above all, we need the eyes of our hearts opened such that the eyes of our minds may also be opened (Eph. 1:17-18). Only then can we faithfully debate others with honesty about our starting points, methods, and ultimate goals in using reason.

____________________

[1] Recent works include Michael Gerson & Peter Wehner, City of Man: Religion and Politics in a New Era (Moody, 2010), Robert Benne, Good and Bad Ways to Think about Religion and Politics (Eerdmans, 2010); Wayne Grudem, Politics According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture (Zondervan, 2010); A better contemporary classic would be Richard John Neuhaus’ The Naked Public Square (Eerdmans, 1984).

[2] Speech, or communication more generally, has also often been linked with the reasoning powers of human beings.

[3] For further discussion of this important point, listen to Ken Myers’ interview with David Schindler on Volume 112 of the Mars Hill Audio Journal (www.marshillaudio.org).

Author: Jackson Watts

Share This Post On

What do you think? Comment Here:

SUBSCRIBE:

The best way to stay up-to-date with the HSF

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This