I was watching a video in which Christopher Hitchens had a discussion with Pastor Wilson, and Wilson stated "someone who bases everything on reason has faith in the reasoning process. What's wrong with saying that? Why can't you say "I have faith in reason"?"
And, indeed, one cannot ask for "proof" or "evidence" that reason works, for one would be using reason in order to reach that conclusion -- we cannot get outside of our minds and then confirm that our reason is correct; one must take reason for granted (i.e., "assume" reason) and then build their system from there.
And it seems to me that Ayn Rand agrees with this fact: "An axiomatic concept... requires no proof or explanation, but [is that] on which all proofs and explanations rest." (As Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, p.56)
Another book you also read is "Five Views on Apologetics" in which Habermas stated, "Frame argues that rationalists must accept reason as an ultimate starting point, just as empiricists assume sense experience, and so on. So, the Christian may begin with Scripture as a legitimate starting point... While the rationalist uses reason and the empiricist uses sense experience as tools from which to construct their systems, Frame assumes the system of Scripture, from which he develops his Christian theism."
So, I wonder what you would respond to this theistic claim. What would you respond if one claimed "You have faith in reason and sense-experience because there is no proof and evidence it is correct. Therefore, I can also believe whatever I want without proof and evidence"??
I would appreciate if you could reply!