[albionin]

I define reason as identification and integration of sensory perceptions of Objective reality by a process of logic or non-contradictory identification. Example: I believe the sun will rise tomorrow because it has risen every day for approximately 4.56 billion years. No one has ever observed the sun not rising precisely when it is supposed to. 2+2=4. Existence exists.

I define faith as belief in knowledge gained from some mystical or supernatural source not connected to sensory perception of objective reality. Example: I believe that man fell from grace and is being punished by God because he ate from the tree of knowledge because it says so in the bible. The Earth is not 4.56 billion years old because it says so in the Bible. The Bible is the true word of God because it says so in the Bible.

What problems do you see with those definitions?

It is implicit that Faith is superior to reason when God demands that one accept his words on faith and not walk by sight but by faith.

[grey_whiskers]

The problem is that you are limiting yourself to "sensory perception of objective reality" without being able to prove that sensory perception alone can interact with / detect / perceive all of objective reality (cf Asimov's line about "It's like trying to describe gamma light to a robot unequipped for gamma-ray reception." from Victory Unintentional -- which incidentally seems to contradict the description of gamma rays as 'fatal' to positronic brains, for example in Little Lost Robot).

Cheers!