It is my "belief" that belief and reasoning are mutually exclusive. They each possess sources of authority (e.g. bible v. Philosophers like Kant or Spinosa) on which beliefs can be based. Reason can essentially be understood as empoying certain methodologicsal principles for inquiry which, if understood, is justifiably an addition to knowledge and therefore authoritative.

Belief, on the other hand, is a position that one can posess that is not capable of demonstration directly (e.g. belief inG-d or even closer to daily events, a question such as, "Do neonates think in visual images?" There being no directly observable ability to examine the question other than to infer on the basis of rpid eye movememnts whether they do or not).

Belief involves a system that implies either an implicit/explicit commitment on the part of the believer. This basis for a person's belief usually is understood to come from the authority of revelation or personal conviction. This revelation is either through some kind of direct infusion, or indirectly, such as the testimony of another source, or individual.

According to my research knowledge, the attachment of faith to the mind is the existence of evidence. If there is convincing mental evidence, faith takes its immediate aftermath, and the mental evidence may be related to something perceptible through hearing or direct vision.