This will be my first philosophical thread in years.

Anyway, a thought has occured.

Premise
There is reason. We can start with this as a premise because it is empirically true. There is a system of deduction known as reason (or logic) and it is structurally rigid and definable.


Argument
(i) There are two different modes of thought on religosity in accepting a higher existence. One of these is to believe there is a logical and/or empirical proof of the existence of a higher being. The other is to believe it is a matter of something called faith.

(ii) Often a retort is made demanding some justification of faith. A typical response would be to say that faith is not justifiable, but is necessary.

(iii) This is necessarily an undefendable response. The word necessary is a logical predicate. It's very use is an act of implying deduction from some definition and requirements of a set of necessary things*.


Conclusion
Faith, like the conception of God in many theologians and mystics, is not capable of holding attributes.



* For those technically inclined; "of a set of statements which are necessarily empirically true.


P.S. One Breath is one of the greatest X-Files episodes ever.