Is religious faith rational?

Página 1

Ontological Argument

A-Priori : an argument not based on evidence or experience

St.Anselm of Canterbury did not intend to argue for Gods existence but argued against "the fool who doesn't believe in God" through a prayer in his book the Proslogian

Anselm described God as "A BEING IN WHICH NO GREATER CAN BE CONCEIVED".He claims that everybody, whether they believe in God or not agrees withthis definition (even the fool in the Psalms who claims he doesn't believe in God).

He uses the analogy of a painter. He claims that, before a painter creates a masterpiece, he can see it clearly in his head though he knows it not to exist; he understands it as a concept. However, once the painting has been finished and it can be seen by the man it reality, the painter both understands the concept of the painting and understands it to exist.

An existent God is clearly greater than a non-existent one and therefore, God – who is perfect by definition – must exist; if God didn’t exist he wouldn't be the greatest thing in existence and therefore, wouldn’t be God

Seeing as God is perfect, he must exist because a non-existent God would be less than perfect and, by definition, not God. Therefore, the statement ‘God exists’ is entirely analytic; by definition, God must exist.

criticized by Gaunilo Gaunilo was also a monk who therefore believed strongly in God. However, he disagreed strongly with Anselm’s way of trying to prove this. Gaunilo claimed that, anything could be thought into existence.

To further illustrate this point, he used the example of a Perfect Island. If a Perfect Island didn't exist it would be a contradiction to call it perfect. Therefore, by definition, the Perfect Island must exist seeing as an existent Island would clearly be ‘more perfect’ than a non-existent one. This however, is not the case.

However, Anselm gave an official response to this criticism with a 2nd argument He claimed the example of the Perfect Island doesn't work because they are contingent, not necessary . The Island, for example, relies on the sea and the Earth meaning that Anselm’s Ontological Argument is not applicable to this and other contingent objects.

The Fool’s disbelief of God (according to Anselm) came from not truly understanding the concept of God. For Anselm’s argument to work, you must understand agree with the correct definition of God.

1.Either God exists or he does not . 2. If he exists he is necessary 3.If he does not he is logically impossible 4.God is not logically impossible 5. Therefore God exists as he is neither logically impossible not contingent

Renes Descarte Reformulation

God is supreme and perfect and necessary. Necessary Existence is perfection. Because he is necessary he is perfect. Necessary existence belongs to God therefore existence belongs to God therefore God exists

His argument does not depend on Anselm's definition but our innate idea of God.Descartes argued that God's existence can be deduced from his nature, just as geometric ideas can be deduced from the nature of shapes for example if you accept the existence of a triangle you must also accept it has 3 sides and 3 angles

Modern Approaches to the Ontological argument

Norman Malcom

Malcolm supported Kant's criticism : that existence cannot be a perfection of something. However he said that If God possesses all perfections he must possess necessary existence,something that cannot not exist.It is a contradiction to say a necessary being does not exist therefore God Exists

Alvin Platinga

Platinga criticized Malcolm argument and offered an alternative.He said If God exists then he has necessary existence. Either God has necessary existence, or he doesn't. If God doesn't have necessary existence, then he necessarily doesn't.Therefore Either God has necessary existence, or he necessarily doesn't.If God necessarily doesn't have necessary existence, then God necessarily doesn't exist.Therefore: Either God has necessary existence, or he necessarily doesn't exist. It is not the case that God necessarily doesn't exist.Therefore:(8) God has necessary existence.If God has necessary existence, then God exists.Therefore God exists.

Criticisms of the Ontological

AquinasSome things are real and evident .God cannot be though of as we only know him by his presence.Any thought of God will be inferior to him,we shouldn't know anything because he is too complex and out of our experience

Kant

Existence is not a predicate but a concept of God.The word existence tells you nothing about God.Existence is synthetic and needs to be tested and verified,God needs to be verified and his reason for existence verified. Existence is not a quality,if I had an imaginary 100 coins in my mind it makes no difference to the reality of how many coins I have.

He argues that such propositions are true only if such a being exists: If a triangle exists, it must have three angles. The necessary proposition, he argues, does not make the existence of a triangle necessary. If there is a God he is beyond our experience.

Hume

Nothing can be proved using A-Priori reasoning

we have no abstract idea of existence therefore, we cannot claim that the idea of God implies his existence. Any conception of God we may have, we can conceive either of existing or of not existing. He believed that existence is not a quality (or perfection), so a completely perfect being need not exist.

Bertrand RussellThe argument does not seem convincing as the essence of a person can be described and their existence remain in question. Eg:Man exists,Santa is a man therefore Santa exists

Revelation

"the communication of some truth by God to a rational creature through means which are beyond the ordinary course of nature" - catholic encyclopedia

Mavrodes - 3 models of Revelation

1.Causation Model : Innate knowledge eg Plato's use of maths

2.Manifestation Model: There is a distinction between claiming something is the case an manifesting the case.We have a spiritual capacity for recognizing God similar to the way we have a physical capacity for recognizing trees

3.Communication Model : God reveals himself through speaking to us through the holy spirit

This has been criticized by those claiming it would be beyond Gods dignity to speak to us.

Propositional : Divine Communication - The catholic church and Islam state God was revealed to humanity through human reception of the lives of Jesus for example the Bible is God breathed and God inspired

Non Propositional: Human discovery of the truth -not god giving knowledge but God's action within human words,deeds done by God to have a divine message.The result of human understanding

Faith and Reason

Augustine: Faith comes first it is the free action of trust,this is supplemented by divine grace.Reason does not cause Faith but supports it therefore Faith is not rationally justifiable "I do not seek to understand that I may believe I seek to believe in order to understand"

HD Lewis said If God without revealed without reason the revelation would be unambiguous and clear to everyone,this is not so hence why we must reason for a relationship with God

Alvin Platinga said belief in God is a basic belief and needs not justification or proof

Theists believe our ability to observe ,hypothesize and test are gifts from God to enable is to observe information about the world,however some religious knowledge is revealed by God without reason

Voluntarist Theory of Faith -Do we choose to believe in God?

William James

In certain circumstances we are justified in having certain beliefs eg,death,suffering.To have faith in these circumstances is justifiable.

There will never be conclusive evidence you must decide yes or no or undecided whether you believe

You are justified in making these decisions on passion able grounds rather than intellectual.These must be pragmatic in their approach-you can make a choice on you being happy

If believing in life after death is most pragmatic then that is justified.William James has been misinterpreted as irrational

Tenant had a subdoxactic approach.Claimed people take faith to experience the unknown however if you do this you have to accept that is might not be real.Science and religion are similar you choose to believe

Faith is a voluntary act to go beyond what we know to what we could know.Faith is viewing the ideally possible as real and act accordingly

Pascal had 3 arguments-the last was all of them combined.If God exists or he does not you can wager for God.If you believe it is infinite knowledge,if not it is finite.A rational,prudent person would choose what gives them the best outcome.Wager for God as this gives the best outcome as Theism is better than atheism

Religious Experience

Conversion

Comes from the greek word "metanoia" - to turn again.It can either be gradual or sudden,coming about through guilt,searching for faith,loneliness,voices and divine communication

Eg.St.Paul,from persecuted to persecutor changing to a disciple on the Road to Damascus

Eg. Nicky Cruz gangster to theist preacher "I opened my mouth but the words were not my own "O God if you have have me come into my life"

Myticism

Can occur either in conscious state or dreams. Blaise Pascal described mysticism as "Joy,Joy,Joy,Reams of Joy"

Julian of Norwich -Anchoress and benedictine nun.Became sick at 30 and when close to death had a number of visions of Christ,symbolizing the motherhood of God and God's mercy towards mankind

William James listed 4 characteristics of mystical experiences 1.Ineffable 2. Noetic 3.Transient 4.Passive

Problems with Religious Experience

God is not material so we cannot use senses or experiences

Can God be recognized from these experiences,the Yorkshire ripper believed God told him to kill prostitutes

Freud believed religious experiences were reactions to a hostile world

Jung said they were archetypes

If you were an atheist you would deny their existence anyway

If you don't have one does that mean God does not exist or are you not chosen?

Why should we accept them?Principle of Credulity and Principle of Testimony