Abstract
This
essay considers the extent that religious faith has anything very significant
to fear, or to gain, from the arguments of philosophers. Within this context of
investigation the essay traces the interaction and clash of faith and reason
from a variety of historical epochs. Specifically, Greek antiquity, the
Christian tradition, Renaissance and Enlightenment thought, Hegel and
Descartes, Existentialism and Pragmatism are considered. The research argues
that while much of the rationality and conclusions reached in these historical
investigations have since been discarded by contemporary thinkers one
recognizes that in many instances faith-based investigation into god and
reasoning have been aligned with each, as well as with traditional academics
concerns, such as politics and culture.
Introduction
Foundational to spiritual and philosophical
investigations are the notions of reason and faith. Adherents to faith argue
that true recognition of god or the divine cannot be grasped through the
implementation of modern notions of reason. These views are contrasted with the
perspective of humanist philosophers who advance notions of reason and science
as necessary foundations of knowledge. In The Gay Science section 125 Nietzsche
proclaims that God is dead – adding that we have killed him. Bearing in mind
the long history of philosophical reflection on the interrelation of reason and
faith, this essay considers whether religious faith has anything very
significant to fear, or to gain, from the arguments of philosophers.
Analysis
There exists considerable exploration into concerns
specifically related to the interaction of faith and reason, with many
philosophers and theologians contending that faith is not necessarily removed
from reason. Indeed, religious theologians and philosophers to justify
religious belief have used both of these concepts. Some contentious have argued
that when reason is properly implemented it affirms faith; in this sense reason
and faith implement essentially the same methodological means of grasping
reality or the divine (Wolterstoff 1998). Still, other perspectives that are
less stringent than these understandings indicate that while reason and faith
adopt different processes of understanding the world, the use of reason will
never be able to contradict faith, as faith is the ‘true’ grasp of this divine
order (Wolterstoff 1998). However, other thinkers have argued that the very
existence of a notion of ‘faith’ necessitates that it be in-direct contention
with notions of reason (Alston 1998). Essentially, this argument considers that
there would be no use for a faith concept if faith truly aligned itself with
reason.
Understandably there is a
significant history of thought devoted to the notions of reason and faith and
their interaction. One of the earliest recorded such philosophical
considerations can be attributed to Greek antiquity. This period of philosophy,
known as the classic period, witnessed an explosion of intellectual growth, as
a variety of thinkers wrote and debated questions that ran to the essence of
the universe and humanity’s place within it. While Judaic traditions were
developed during this period, to a large degree their focus was on human
existence; conversely, the Greek’s considered notions of faith in regards to
larger cosmological concerns (Melchert 2002). To a degree it appears that two
separate traditions of thought developed in Greek society, with one embracing
religious beliefs and the other more philosophically based notions of reason
(Melchert 2002). Still, these Greek belief patterns were not entirely
exclusive. Some theorists contend that faith and reason interacted in Greek
society through the mythmaking system that developed (Melchert 2002). In these
regards, Greek gods emerged that also embodied some civic virtues. These
virtues would then be dispersed down to daily life, as individuals would
attempt to incorporate them into their value system and regular interactions.
It was only later that philosophers would attempt to attach reason or rational
significance to these mythological elements that influenced civic practice
(Melchert 2002). From this perspective it seems that it is religious faith that
has a greater influence on reason than on the later.
While broad ranging theories
regarding reason and faith in Greek antiquity point towards the primacy of
faith based modes of understanding as leading civic life, more specific
analysis demonstrates reveals further insights. Perhaps central to
considerations of philosophy in Greek antiquity is the work of Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle. To a great extent these thinkers seem less to establish modes of
structural organization for faith, but rather seem to indicate that there are
underlining forms of reason or intellectual organization to the faith based
modes of understanding (Melchert 2002). While there are a variety of potential
examples to consider perhaps the most prominent is Plato’s notion of the forms.
In these regards, Plato implemented faith-based logic in his assuming that
there were underlining forms to things such as ‘good’ (Melchert 2002). While
faith-based reasoning is the defining element of this philosophical notion, one
recognizes that to an extent faith based modes of understanding could gain from
the recognition of their positioning within the broader spectrum of such
reasoning as it indicates areas where faith is viably the only alternative to
gaining stable knowledge or meaning.
To a great degree Aristotle extended
Plato’s original investigations into theology and faith-based understandings,
however he disagrees with many of Plato’s assumptions. One considers that
Aristotle rejected Plato’s concepts of the forms (Melchert 2002). While
Aristotle’s replacement for the Platonic system – the unmoved mover as an
unchangeable cosmic entity – was not seemingly based on any firmer grounds, it
is significant that he was able to freely challenge the earlier Platonic
perspectives without being accused of heresy (Melchert 2002). In these regards,
there is the recognition that philosophical based modes of investigation even
when incorporating elements of faith, remain in the arena that is opening to
continual challenge and reconsideration, whereas faith based modes of thought
continually resist any form of amendment.
Additionally, both thinkers embraced
the notion of god, while at the same time implementing reason to do so. In
these regards they experimented with the notion of religious apologetics. That
is, the specific implementation of reason to prove the existence of a god or
divine figure. Such explorations can be discovered in Plato’s Laws and Aristotle’s Physics. In his text, Aristotle
demonstrated the existence of an unmoved mover from evidence reflected in the
motion of the world (Pojman 1994). Plotinus, another prominent thinker from
Greek antiquity similarly implemented notions of reason and faith in his own
philosophical discourse (Pojman 1994). While Plato and Aristotle’s ideas on the
divine seem to contradict each other, Plotinus’ perspective unites them under a
single discourse. Similarly, while Plato relied on faith-based reason, albeit
in a philosophical context, and Aristotle seems to have been more aligned with
reasoning through the linking of his theoretical perspective with the motion of
the planets, Plotinus offers a hybrid interpretation of reality implementing
both reason and faith-based models (Melchert 2002). To an extent it appears
that Plotinus’ modes of understanding reflect the earlier understood versions
of faith that must be in-direct accord with reason. Plotinus perspective, as
articulated in the Enneads, argues that all modes of being and value originate
from a singular force in the universe; he equates this singular force with the
form of the Good, as established in Plato’s faith based rationalizations, or
possible Aristotle’s original mover (Melchert 2002). While this original
element is largely based on faith, he further argues that individuals within
contemporary existence can either choose to live their lives in accord with
this original force, or instead operate away from it. In a sense this form of
reasoning, while rooted in faith-based modes of understanding also attaches
rational significance to these elements within ancient Greek civic life. This
mode of understanding has been referred to as negative theology, as it divines
God by all things he isn’t (Melchert 2002). Again this is an instance where
faith and reason have been combined as a means of achieving a greater
perspective on existence. There is the recognition with Plotinus and Aristotle,
as well as to a lesser degree with Plato, that reason is able to function up to
a specific level, but there are ultimately unanswerable questions.
The notions of thought exemplified
in the major ancient Greek thinkers seems to conflict with modern faith-based
religious practices that choose to allow faith to dictate entire mythmaking
systems. One considers that to a large extent these modern religious
institutions are rooted in Judaic traditions that themselves were in existence
during the period of Greek antiquity and Christian traditions that developed
relatively soon after (Pojman 1994). While most individuals in Western culture
are familiar with the foundational beliefs of the Christian Judaic traditions
it is notable to consider them in relation to the thought process of the
aforementioned Greek thinkers. While the Greek thinkers combined reason and faith-based
modes of understanding in the development of a largely nebulous god concept
that mirrors later transcendental notions, the Christian tradition embrace the
notion of an all-powerful God – constituted by three figures -- who created the
world in seven days. Additionally, they embraced a Jesus figure that sacrificed
his life for the sins of humanity.
While such considerations are
entirely founded on faith there are also a number of ways that the Christian
tradition embraced reason. One of the most prominent of the early Christian
thinkers was St. Paul. One of the challenges in determining Paul’s stance on
faith or reason in relation to Christianity is that there are a plethora of
interpretations of his writings. What ultimately emerges are conflicting
perspectives on the extent that Paul believed reason could function to reveal
the truths about Christianity or whether there was a transcendent ‘revelation’
that occurred to some individuals allowing them to grasp this divine reality
(McGrath 1995). In terms of the first perspective scholars argue that Paul
directly engaged in philosophical discussions regarding Christianity and in a
sense argued for a natural theology. Namely, these interpretations consider
instances where Paul seems to argue that Christianity could be grasped through
real world observation (Pojman 1994). Conversely, other interpretations argue
that Paul neglected these modes of understanding and instead embraced the
belief that the only way to truly grasp God’s existence was to experience the
revelation process, wherein God miraculously reveals his presence (McGrath
1995).
The distinction between Christianity
as established through reason or faith has continued since the early period to
develop two of the major sections of Christian thought. One Christian thinker
that considered such issues, as well as implemented reason as a means to better
understand Christianity was St. Augustine. Today Augustine has gained a seminal
position in Christian theology for his deliberations on the topic. Augustine
embraced notions of faith in grasping the divine essence of God. Still,
Augustine also recognized that reason should be welcomed in Christian theology as
a means of faith justifying itself (Pojman 1994). It seems, however, that
Augustine placed a higher degree of importance on faith-based understanding
than he did reason as a way of grasping the divine (Ehrman 2011). Perhaps
controversially by contemporary standards St. Augustine argued that it was all
right to implement pagan sciences to attempt to study the Christian faith. He
believed that these perspectives could potentially illuminate elements of
Christianity (Ehrman 2011). This is a significant consideration in light of
contemporary discourse. It is not a drastic step to equate the 4th
century pagan sciences that Augustine alludes to, to contemporary academic
institutions. In Augustine’s time, as well as in contemporary circumstances, it
is the church that is the final arbiter regarding decisions of religious
doctrine; one considers the Catholic Church as retaining many of the hardline
stances on revelation that emerged as early as St. Paul (Pojman 1994). Still,
St. Augustine is arguing that there exists a divine essence that religious
practitioners need not hide from reason. From a contemporary lens Augustine’s
thought would potentially removed such decision making from the Catholic Church
and place it in the context of reason or rational discourse that has been
established by academic institutions. What emerge are views of faith that while
adamantly criticizing pagan beliefs, have instead adopted a form of mysticism
as a means of justifying their underlining claims to truth. Instead of such a
stringent rejection of reason, it seems that religious discourse should openly
recognize that their belief structures must exist in a dynamic process that
functions in relation to faith elements.
While significant theological
considerations regarding faith and reason were explored during the Medieval
Period to an extent these views can be linked to earlier ideas established by
St. Paul and later St. Augustine. The next historical epochs to significantly
deliberate on notions of faith and reason were the Renaissance and
Enlightenment periods. One of the primary considerations of this period was the
recognition that forms of science and empirical knowledge had become highly
developed since St. Paul’s early teachings. While during the early Christian
period and the Medieval era there was a periodic linking of faith to reason,
with the advancement of empirical modes of understanding faith and reason
experience a much greater divide.
One considers that the significant
divide that occurred during this period resulted in some of the greatest
missuses of faith in recorded human history. One of the most notable of these
instances was Galileo’s rejection of the Ptolemaic system in favor of the
Copernican model. While Galileo’s understanding was based on empirical
evidence, the Catholic Church condemned his ideas and he was labeled a heretic.
While many past conceptions had implemented reason to understand faith, it is
clear that in this instance the Catholic Church demonstrated gross overreach of
faith in their rejection and condemnation of Galileo’s empirically derived
knowledge. Still, there were instances during this period where reason was
implemented as a means of illuminating faith. One of the most prominent
occurred with the philosophy of Rene Descartes. Descartes, through his
Meditations, developed a system of reason that claimed to have determined the existence
of God (Grayling 2005). While contemporary philosophers reject Descartes’
assumption that God exists since God cannot be a deceiver, it seems that there
is strength gained when religious doctrine is subjected to the confines of
rational thought. G.W.F. Hegel, another prominent Enlightenment thinker,
implemented reason-based rationality as a means of justifying the notion of
faith. To an extent it seems that Hegel’s notion of faith is removed from early
notions, as it is more refined in its descriptive elements (Houlgate 2005).
Still, much of what Hegel justified through rational means could potentially
fall under the more primitive notions of revelation. Specifically, Hegel
considered that there was too much emphasis in the world placed on empiricism
as a means of understanding reality (Houlgate 2005). Hegel considered that much
knowing occurs through internal emotions means of recognition, wherein two
separate emotions emerged (Houlgate 2005). His affirmation of God was in the
deterministic process where one of these specific emotional potentials was
embrace over another. One considers that such modes of rationalization continue
to influence post-modern theory in the institutional environment, leaving one
to question why religious doctrine refuses to subject itself to cling to the
nebulous notion of faith over academic investigation (Houlgate 2005).
The 19th and 20th
centuries witnessed other prominent considerations regarding reason and faith. One
of the most prominent perspectives that emerged during that period was
existentialism. Existentialism placed a strong emphasis on the individual and
their personal creation of meaning (Solomon 1974). While Kierkegaard embraced
the notion of God and faith, Nietzsche, as noted in the introduction, claimed that
God is dead. Nietzsche’s belief is contingent on the notion of God as a social
creation; instead Nietzsche argued that humans derive their own value system
and embrace the will to power (Tanner 1994). While Nietzsche’s perspective may
run extreme, it seems many of the existentialist emphasis on personal
responsibility over blind allegiance to notions of faith is a strong aspect
religion can learn from (Tanner 1994). Many of the world’s major belief systems
are contingent on the notion of an afterlife and similar justifications for
hardship. Existentialism argues that life should only be lived within the
confines of reason, rather than religious doctrine determinable only by faith. The
clear implications of such a consideration is the potential for individuals to
not live their lives to the greatest capacity, since they believe the religious
doctrine that indicates there will be an afterlife. Similarly, there is the
potential that these individuals do not properly internalize external events
and as such do not gain as much as they should from their experiences. Still,
furthermore, the embracement of a faith-based mode of understanding oftentimes
does merely function in the religious arena, but also extends into other
aspects of the individual’s life. In these regards, the adoption of faith over
reason in regards to God could have the potential impact of leading the
individual to implement such logic in terms of politics or even to outright
reject scientific findings. The obvious impact of such a world-view is
dangerous not only to the individual, but to the society they live and are
expected to make equal contributions.
Another prominent perspective that
emerged during this period was pragmatism, which situated faith as at times
necessary to act in the world. Finally, this time period witnessed the
emergence of Darwin’s theory of natural selection and evolutionary theory. Like
Galileo before him, Darwin’s theory of evolution is grounded in scientific
evidence, however faith-based modes of reasoning from religious institutions
have frequently failed to embrace the theory because it contradicts doctrine (Helm
1999). It seems in such instances that faith again has overstepped its
boundaries and must be realigned with reason. While such large-scale attacks of
reason on religious doctrine occur infrequently, one considers that there may
be many small instances wherein the subjection of religion to more rational or
empirical modes of investigation could reveal and sharpen theological practice.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this essay has
considered the extent that religious faith has anything very significant to
fear, or to gain, from the arguments of philosophers. While much of the
rationality and conclusions reached in these historical investigations have
since been discarded by contemporary thinkers one recognizes that in many
instances faith-based investigation into god and reasoning have been aligned
with each, as well as with traditional academics concerns, such as politics and
culture. Today such considerations surrounding religion have been seemingly
discarded such that religious studies only consider historical or
socio-cultural elements surrounding religion. What emerge are views of faith
that while adamantly criticizing pagan beliefs, have instead adopted a form of
mysticism as a means of justifying their underlining claims to truth. Questions
of the existence of god are entirely left to faith-based modes of understanding,
which remain largely static even in the face of overwhelming contradictory
scientific evidence. It appears that the inclusion of religion within the realm
of rational investigation would not necessarily cease the institution of
religion, but rather establish more stringent foundations for the truth claims
that exist therein. Instead of such a stringent rejection of reason, it seems
that religious discourse should openly recognize that their belief structures
must exist in a dynamic process that functions in relation to faith elements. Ultimately,
such considerations could extend religion outside of its marginal bounds to a
position of even greater social prominence.
References
Alston,
W. (1998) “History of Philosophy of
Religion.” The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Vol. 8. Ed. E. Craig. New York: Routledge.
Ehrman,
B (2011). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early
Christian Writings. Oxford
University Press
Grayling,
A.C. (2005). Descartes: The Life and times of a Genius. New York: Walker
Publishing Co.
Helm,
P. (1999). Faith and Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Houlgate,
S. (2005). An Introduction to Hegel. Freedom, Truth and History. Oxford:
Blackwell
McGrath,
A. (1995). The Christian Theology Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Melchert,
N (2002). The Great Conversation: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy. New York: McGraw Hill.
Pojman,
L. (1994). Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology. 2nd ed.
Belmont CA.: Wadsworth.
Solomon,
R. (1974). Existentialism. New York: The Modern Library.
Tanner,
M (1994). Nietzsche. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolterstoff,
N. (1998) “Faith.” The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 3. Ed.
E. Craig. London: Routledge
0 comments:
Post a Comment