punkdbass
I will be what I will be
Obviously many threads have been made on this subject, but I would like to bring up and discuss the following 4 views and hear your guys own thoughts as well.
1. Today in western society the phrase "take a leap of faith" is generally has positive connotations, but to 1800's Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard who came up with the phrase, thought that since reason and evidence cant prove God's existence that belief in God meant taking a "leap of faith" across the borders of rationality. To him, taking a leap of faith meant to jump off a cliff hoping that God would catch you. The point being that the act of faith is irrational. But despite this, Kierkegaard still managed to find "beauty" in what he thought to be such an irrational act.
2. American philosopher William James(1842-1910) makes the pragmatic argument that believing in God is "rational" insofar as it doesn't conflict with our other beliefs and if it tends to make us lead better lives. In other words if believing in God is something that makes sense to you and adds a lot of practical benefits to your life, then it is rational to hold onto your belief.
3. To build further onto this point, Conservative Rabbi Elliot Dorff describes the "cost of agnosticism" being that one must consciously ignore the many aspects of or experience that we do not fully understand – or at least renounce any epistemological/existential responsibility for them.. For example, you never truly know if a person is the perfect one to marry.. so you could resolve to never marry to preserve your epistemological purity, but it would come with the cost of never learning about life from the role of a spouse or parent. I think Dorff's main point is that if one refuses to give faith a chance, then you would be forced to take many "sublime" moments of life less seriously.. where as if you had faith, you would take these "sublime" moments more seriously and thus reap practical benefit from them.
4. Abraham Joshua Heschel makes the following points about the topic of faith and reason:
To be honest I havent thought about the topic of faith and rationality enough.. but for now I cant give you a definitive answer saying that faith IS rational.. but I completely agree with James and Dorff that having faith can bring a lot of positive things to a persons life, and in that sense I definitely view it as being a rational act. And I also agree with Heschel that many personal aspects of faith and religion are perhaps beyond the scope and limits of reason.
1. Today in western society the phrase "take a leap of faith" is generally has positive connotations, but to 1800's Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard who came up with the phrase, thought that since reason and evidence cant prove God's existence that belief in God meant taking a "leap of faith" across the borders of rationality. To him, taking a leap of faith meant to jump off a cliff hoping that God would catch you. The point being that the act of faith is irrational. But despite this, Kierkegaard still managed to find "beauty" in what he thought to be such an irrational act.
2. American philosopher William James(1842-1910) makes the pragmatic argument that believing in God is "rational" insofar as it doesn't conflict with our other beliefs and if it tends to make us lead better lives. In other words if believing in God is something that makes sense to you and adds a lot of practical benefits to your life, then it is rational to hold onto your belief.
3. To build further onto this point, Conservative Rabbi Elliot Dorff describes the "cost of agnosticism" being that one must consciously ignore the many aspects of or experience that we do not fully understand – or at least renounce any epistemological/existential responsibility for them.. For example, you never truly know if a person is the perfect one to marry.. so you could resolve to never marry to preserve your epistemological purity, but it would come with the cost of never learning about life from the role of a spouse or parent. I think Dorff's main point is that if one refuses to give faith a chance, then you would be forced to take many "sublime" moments of life less seriously.. where as if you had faith, you would take these "sublime" moments more seriously and thus reap practical benefit from them.
4. Abraham Joshua Heschel makes the following points about the topic of faith and reason:
- Religion gives unique insight, and thus cant properly be synchronized with the conclusions of any philosophical system or science
- Reasons goal is the exploration and verification of objective relations, religions goal is the exploration and verification of ultimate personal questions
- Several aspects of religion and our experiences of life go beyond reason (love, prayer, morality, reverence, faith), thus we can’t judge religion entirely with reason, for religion goes beyond the scope and limits of reason.
To be honest I havent thought about the topic of faith and rationality enough.. but for now I cant give you a definitive answer saying that faith IS rational.. but I completely agree with James and Dorff that having faith can bring a lot of positive things to a persons life, and in that sense I definitely view it as being a rational act. And I also agree with Heschel that many personal aspects of faith and religion are perhaps beyond the scope and limits of reason.
Last edited: