Faith (like Christianity, Islam, cladistics and particle physics) is convinced that there is a meeting point between assumption and deduction, where the assumed thus can be deduced and where the deduced thus equals the assumed.
Fact is, however, that assumption and deduction is orthogonal, ie, diametrically opposed, meaning that this imaginable meeting place actually is a paradox (called Russell’s paradox). This imaginable meeting point is thus in practice a void.
However, since faith is convinced that there is something in this void, it has a tendency to avoid rethinking, instead filling the void with a paradox that fits the particular context (eg, a “God”, a “true tree of life” or a “Higgs particle”), and then claim (assert) that this filling can be found outside of our heads. This claim is thus correct insofar that a paradox can be found, but not insofar that it can be found outside of our heads. If it could have, then it would have falsified facts such as that time is relative to speed in space and Cantor’s diagonal argument, thereby ridiculing mathematics.
Fortunately, faith is not correct. Paradoxes like “God”, “a true tree of life” and “Higgs particle” actually can’t be found outside of our heads. They can actually never liberate themselves from their state as brain-ghosts.
Fact is instead that assumption and deduction can’t meet, because they are orthogonal. This fact is thus something we just have to learn to live with (like all other facts). We can explore both it and how it influences our discussion about the world outside of our heads, but we can’t get rid of it (ie, find something in it), because it emerges as a void in the moment we start discussing the world outside of heads.