Reason is our soul's left hand, Faith her right.
~John Donne

There are two well-known Latin phrases that state “CONTRA EVIDENTIA CREDO” and “CREDO QUIA EVIDENTIA”. Translated into English, these bring up the debate over “I believe despite the evidence,” versus “I believe because of the evidence”; in other words, faith versus science.

In today’s technology-based existence, it is sometimes difficult to define that contentious line between the very contrasting worlds of naturalism and supernaturalism. On one side, it’s very easy to see how people often need tangible confirmation for things; it’s difficult to believe in something when your convictions are based purely on faith alone. On the other hand, when an individual is so deeply rooted in their faith (whether it be devoutly religious or more spiritual), it’s a thorny situation to try to persuade them into anything scientific that contradicts their committed beliefs.

When it comes to society, as Clark points out, “in the realm of faith there is often little agreement”, so it’s necessary to base societal standards on what is at hand—the concrete, scientific evidence. As most politicians see it, it’s reasonable to ethical values influenced by faith, but when it comes to a public whose beliefs vary from Christian to atheist, it’s fundamental to their success to stray from religion and ground political stances solely on rational facts, something available to every citizen no matter what beliefs they hold.

In my opinion, the best route to pursue is that of pragmatic empiricism—a practical reliance upon experience. It acknowledges a view of “this world naturalism”—you know what you’ve experienced; it doesn’t try to answer all the questions, but agrees that we all live in the same world and thus have much in common; and it focuses on “reality-based” issues that of direct significance to us in the here-and-now (a very important motto for me as previously mentioned), without having to agonize over the clash between the colliding worldviews.

Albert Einstein seemed to put it best when he said, “All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. All these aspirations are directed toward ennobling man's life, lifting it from the sphere of mere physical existence and leading the individual towards freedom.” Ultimately, it doesn’t boil down to which view is accurate (naturalism or supernaturalism), but that they all unite at the core to reward us all with the choice to have an independent will and a vibrant passion for life.