Kierkegaard, The Leap of Faith and the Limits of Reason

1
Kierkegaard, The Leap of Faith and the Limits
of Reason

• Late 19th C. Danish philosopher
• Christian existentialist
• Argues that it is not possible to prove the
  existence of God through reason, since it is
  difficult to prove the existence of anything.

2
Paradox of Reason

• We cannot prove the existence of God, nor that
  God does not exist, yet we are constantly moved
  to attempt to decide the issue rationally.

3
Kierkegaards Argument

• P1. The only way that we can prove Gods
  existence is to begin by presupposing it.
• P2. But since this is question-begging, such a
  method cannot rationally
• demonstrate Gods existence.
• C. Thus to believe in God or even to make the
  attempt to understand the nature of God is to
  make a leap of faith. Only then can one begin to
  understand Gods purpose.

4
Reason and Faith

• Is Faith the opposite of Reason?
• No. There are various forms of non-rational
  approaches to faith (Fideism)
• Fideism from mild to extreme
• - religious belief is based on faith not reason
• - reason and faith are distinct
• - reason and faith may conflict
• - attempts to intellectualize faith may be wrong

5
Forms of Fideism

• Pre Rational accept that p is true and
  rationally provable, but hasnt been yet.
  (Anselm, Aquinas)
• 2. Supra Rational accept that p is true as the
  result of the mystical apprehension of a larger
  (rational) truth. (Plato)
• 3. Irrational accept that p is true because it
  isnt rational. (Tertullian, Kierkegaard)

6
Kierkegaard

• Ks argument highlights the epistemic problem of
  Reason vs. Faith
• The solution to problem could be stated as
  assessing the significance and relation of
  rational vs. the non-rational contributions to
  our understanding
• Are there good enough reasons to be purely
  rational?

7
James, The Will to Believe

• Thesis logic or reason is not incompatible with
  faith.

8
Some distinctions

• Hypothesis an assertion
• either live or dead live if it is at all
  possible or credible for someone otherwise it is
  dead
• Option a choice between two hypotheses
• living if either of the hypotheses is live
• (otherwise it is dead)
• forced if the choice cannot be avoided
• (otherwise it is avoidable)
• momentous only if it is crucial that we act on
  one or the other options
• (otherwise it is trivial)

9
The Religious Hypotheses

• 1. The best things are the eternal things.
• 2. Better to believe in Religion even if false.

10
James Argument

• P1. Gods existence is a living option.
• P2. Religion is a momentous option.
• P3. It is a forced option.
• P4. To choose not to believe in religion (God) is
  to think it is better to fear being wrong more
  than hope for the possibility of eternal good.
• P5. But this cannot be right.

11
James Argument, cont.

• C1. Therefore holding the religious hypothesis is
  to be preferred to any alternative.
• P6. Religion is the kind of hypothesis which we
  can only see to be true if we accept it first.
• C2. Thus, it is a kind of truth which we cannot
  see if we are skeptical of it.

12
James Argument, cont.

• P7. Any rule that prevents us from being able to
  apprehend a kind of truth must be a bad rule.
• C3. So there cannot be a command of reason to be
  skeptical of religion.
• C. Therefore the religious hypothesis is
  compatible with reason.

13
Faith and Rational Belief

• Faith is not the same as rational belief
• 1. Rational Belief assumes the possibility that
  the assertion is false.
• 2. Rational Beliefs could be falsified by the
  empirical evidence.
• Faith, unlike belief, is unlimited by the
  empirical facts of the world.
• Faith is limited by social and contextual
  features of ones culture.