Whether one believes in God or not, a person must have a reason for his or her belief. There must be a rationale, in some form, that supports the belief or thought process which the individual has. For example, philosopher John Searle does not believe in God, arguing there is not enough available evidence about how the world works to justify such a belief.
He does not believe in the supernatural either, but holds that there is, among intellectuals of the world today who have become so secularized, a sense where the existence of God or the supernatural would not matter as much as it would have a century ago. He presents a logic as to why he does not

Plato, on the other hand, presents his reasoning for believing in God and/or the supernatural through Socrates discussion with a religious fanatic shortly before his trial in the "Euthyphro." Euthyphro is a young, zealously pious man determined to bring a lawsuit against his own father over the death of one of their servants. When Socrates questions the propriety of proceeding

against one's father, rebukes him, asserting that the only relevant question is whether the killer has acted justly. concedes that most people will regard prosecution of one's father on behalf of a hired hand as the height of impiety, but he insists that he understands the will of the gods more plainly and precisely than most. This is the presumption that Socrates questions in the dialogue, and defeats. That same presumption that one person knows more about the will of the gods is an issue that must be

examined in the larger question of whether faith in God is a matter of faith based on reason or on reason alone. One can only determine one's own level of faith based on the reason that most coincides with his or her own belief of what reason is and what reason is not. Therefore, the acceptance or the adherence of a belief in God is independently determined via the rationale

ascribed by the person doing the believing. While such a logic points only to the person making the decision regarding their faith, surely that is all that is required in the larger context of whether one believes in God or not. Whether another person finds the reasoning behind the first person's beliefs to be irrational is not the issue. Whether God exists or does not exist is not the issue. The question to be considered is what one In Socrates' dialogue with
Euthyphro he shows the young man that it is difficult to infer what the gods think about justice, for careful attention to tradition reveals that the gods quarrel bitterly about the just, the noble and the good. Then he argues that these quarrels raise the question of which of the different and conflicting things that the gods hold dear is truly just, and thereby he seeks to show that the question of justice is more fundamental than that of what the gods hold dear. The ultimate outcome brought forth by Socrates is the fact that Euthyphro cannot presume to know plainly the will of the gods. This argument can then be applied to the issue of whether one's belief in God is based on faith or reason. The point being more to the fact that belief, for any individual, as said before, is based on his or her own reasoning. It cannot be codified or institutionalized but must be what it is. To return to modern philosopher John Searle, as he tells in a recent interview of a dinner party he attended where Bertrand Russell was the guest of honor. Searle says: "So we asked him, 'What would happen if you were wrong about the existence of God? What would you say to Him? That is, suppose you died and you went to heaven and there you were in front of Him - what would you say? Russell didn't hesitate a second. He said,
"I would say, 'You didn't give us enough evidence.'" (39). Searle points to that statement of indicative of what he himself believes. There simply is not enough evidence. Searle adds, "On the available evidence we have about how the world works, we have to say that we're

alone, there is no God, we don't have a cosmic friend, we're on our own. I might be wrong about that, but on the available evidence, that's the situation we're in" (39). Therefore, humanity has before it a number of equally valid reasons for their belief in God.
And, as is the case with virtually all intellectual pursuits of humanity but especially religion and politics, the goal becomes for one human to validate to another that his or her reasons are of greater validity than those proffered
It's important to keep in mind the fact that faith is an attitude of the entire self. Faith, which includes both will and intellect, is directed toward a person, an idea, or-as in the case of religious faith-a divine being. Modern

theologians agree in emphasizing this total existential character of faith, thus distinguishing it from the popular conception of faith that identifies it with belief as opposed to knowledge. Faith indeed includes belief but goes far beyond it, and in the history of theology the distinction has more often been drawn between faith and works than between faith and knowledge. For example, Christian theology has traditionally distinguished between the "subjective" element in faith, which involves the supernatural action of God upon the human soul, and faith's "objective" component, which is characterized as adherence If humanity is to suppose or agree upon the idea that that there is a divine force in the universe, those who have felt that there has not been sufficient reason to so believe such a premise may then intellectualize the issue by seeing it as a fact of physics like any other. As a result, instead of just four forces in the universe, a fifth force is perceived. Searles argues that in this sense, human attitudes about the existence of God wouldn't be as important to humanity since, to a large degree, the world has already become demystified
(42). Such a statement then brings the argument back around to the concept of reason. While there is a distinct difference between faith and irrationality, humanity does not have the wherewithal to adequately define what it is. All that individual humans can logically define is their personal belief which cannot be determined or defined by externalities. Where one person sees reason another sees magic and where that person sees