I'm a former Christian, and I'm fascinated by intelligent Christians' ability to compartmentalize.
In every other area of their lives, Christians can be savvy, skeptical, rational...only to be credulous when it comes to religion.
In fact, they compartmentalize even at the "faith" level. Christians can give plenty of rational reasons why miraculous claims by Muslims are obviously dubious, but feel sincerely justified in believing supernatural elemants of their own creed.
In my efforts to understand what is going on in the mind of Christians, I've (currently) concluded the following:
*Some seem to be able to reason about their beliefs (apologetics), but most of those attempts deconstruct down to some form of Pascal's Wager or Kierkegaardian Leap, which are essentially the same thing—"Why not believe? Life is hard and it can't hurt."
There are a few Christian/spiritual thought schools I'm impressed with. They have depth and devotion, admit agnosticism on many issues, don't dogmatically ignore evidence, etc. To what extent this group can be called "Christian" is disputable, but it's how they see themselves, so...
I'm a former Christian, and I'm fascinated by intelligent Christians' ability to compartmentalize.
I don't think that's anything specific to Christianity or religion.
Professors who teach evidence-based medicine at universities generally don't have any problem with the fact that they use non-evidence-based teaching methods to do it.
Very skeptical philosophers still think that they retirement money they invested in the stock market is safe.
This person seems to have the virtue of non-compartmentalization. What rationalist skill can we learn from this? Maybe look for ways a strong belief in one domain, to another where it's more testable?
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/09/i_was_a_fundamentalist_until_science_changed_my_mind_partner/