What are faith and faithfulness, and how are they related? We consider two views that express very different answers to these questions. On our view, faith and faithfulness are distinct and yet complement each other. Faith is resilient reliance and faithfulness is resilient reliability, both of which involve conative and/or affective elements. In contrast, while Jonathan Kvanvig also holds that faith involves conative and/or affective elements, he identifies faith with a disposition to act in service of an ideal in the face of difficulty. However, this view of faith leads to some puzzling claims about how faith relates to faithfulness. We evaluate several claims suggested by what Kvanvig says, arguing both that his view loses sight of the distinctness of faith and faithfulness and that the inferences he wants to draw from faithfulness or faithful behaviour to faith are unjustified. Instead, we aim to show how the insights he calls to our attention can be better accommodated and explained by a more comprehensive, unified theory of faith and faithfulness and their relations.

什么是信心和信实，它们有什么关系？我们考虑两种观点，它们对这些问题表达了非常不同的答案。在我们看来，信心和信实是不同的，但又是相辅相成的。信仰是有弹性的依赖，而忠诚是有弹性的可靠性，两者都涉及暗示和/或情感元素。相比之下，虽然乔纳森·克万维格也认为信仰包含意动和/或情感元素，但他将信仰等同于在面对困难时为理想服务的倾向。然而，这种信仰观导致了一些关于信仰如何与忠诚相关的令人费解的主张。我们评估了 Kvanvig 所说的几个主张，争辩说他的观点忽略了信仰和忠诚的区别，并且他想从忠诚或忠诚的行为中得出对信仰的推论是不合理的。相反，我们的目标是展示他引起我们注意的见解如何可以通过更全面、统一的信仰和忠诚理论及其关系更好地适应和解释。