Assess the Role of Faith in Supporting Religious Belief Essay Example for Free

Assess the Role of Faith in Supporting Religious Belief Essay In 1877, William Kingdon Clifford propositioned in his book â€Å"Ethics and Belief† that belief in something without sufficient evidence is irrational. Whilst he accepted that in many beliefs there is often an epistemic gap between the evidence and the conclusion (inductive reasoning) he did also claim that â€Å"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.† Furthermore he claimed that that tolerating credulity (a tendency to believe readily) and superstition will damage ultimately society. He concurred with David Hume (1711-76) when he said â€Å"All wise men proportion their belief to the evidence. † This stance – that belief without sufficient evidence is irrational – is called evidentialism, and is adopted by many atheists (including Clifford and Hume) in their view of theology. However, natural theology instead attempts to meet evidentialism on its own terms by trying to show that belief in God is actually rational. It draws collectively upon all of the a posteriori arguments for God’s existence including the teleological, cosmological, moral and experiential arguments. However, it is rare that an atheist will be convinced by the evidence of these arguments anywhere beyond the point of agnosticism. It is generally accepted that belief in God requires some element of seemingly irrational faith. Indeed, the stance of fideism states that reason plays no part in belief. â€Å"Whoever attempts to demonstrate the existence of God†¦is an excellent subject for a comedy of higher lunacy.† – Soren Kierkegaard. Moderate fideists suggest that reason can actually be destructive to one’s faith. They claim that reason leads to arrogance by encouraging the idea that human reason alone will suffice and that God unnecessary for moral or spiritual direction. Whilst moderate theists view reason as a barrier to true faith however, (thus disregarding natural theology as irrelevant) extreme theists go so far as to agree with Tertullian when he said (AD 155-222) â€Å"Credo quia absurdum est.† or â€Å"I believe because it is absurd.† Aquinas (1225-74) claimed that there were two ways in which to know God. The first is through natural theology, including his five a posteriori proofs constructed by human reason. The second is through â€Å"revealed theology† which cannot be found by human reason alone, but must involve divine intervention or revelation. The acceptance of these revealed truths requires faith, and this is fundamental to the Christian religion. For example, only faith can reveal the truth behind the statement â€Å"God is the father, the son and the Holy Ghost† or that â€Å"the bread of communion is the body of Christ†. Thus revelation provides us with a body of truths, which must be taken on faith alone. Aquinas claims that faith is a combination of reason and opinion. It involves reason since it is propositional i.e. claims certain beliefs to be true and therefore similar to scientific knowledge. On the other hand these truths cannot be proved, and so involve an epistemic gap. It is this epistemic gap that makes faith a matter of opinion and so allows humanity free will over their belief. The stance that it is our choice whether or not to take a leap of faith was also held by Soren Kierkegaard (1812-1855). Alvin Plantinga (1932-) proposed that the classical foundationalism upon which evidentialism is based is flawed. Foundationalist beliefs are described by Plantinga as â€Å"the starting points for thought† and he summarises their definition as: â€Å"I am entitled to believe X without any evidence if and only if it is self-evident, incorrigible or certain to me in some way†. He argues that this is flawed, since this statement is itself neither self-evident, incorrigible nor is it certain in some way. It appears therefore that foundationalism defines itself as irrational. He also states that there are many beliefs that can be held rationally, but that do not fall under the foundationalist criteria or that can be justified contingently. For example, the trust we have in our memory, or the belief that other people have minds of their own. Plantinga argues that we must ultimately reject classical foundationalism on the grounds that it is incoherent, and also because it rejects many beliefs that common sense tells us to be properly basic. He propositions that his reformed epistemology should take the place of classical foundationalism, and because of this: â€Å"It is entirely right, rational, reasonable and proper to believe in God without any evidence at all.† A theist might claim that it just appears obvious to them that God exists, and for Plantinga this is good enough. However, surely this would mean that anything we like can be a properly basic belief? Could a child’s belief in Santa Clause not be defined as properly basic? Plantinga would respond by saying that it is the beliefs directly connected to God’s existence that are properly basic, rather than the belief in God’s existence itself. For example, the guilt felt after committing a bad deed or the sense that something must have cre ated and designed the universe. Blaisà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ Pascal (1623-1662) deemed that it was reasonable to have faith in God by a sheer act of will, so certain was he that he put forward a wager: â€Å"Let us weigh the gain and loss in wagering that God is (exists)†¦If you gain, you gain all, if you lose, you lose nothing.† By this, he meant that the theist stands the chance of gaining entrance to heaven at the risk of nothing, whilst the atheist however risks damnation to hell. However, surely this basis of self-gain is at odds with the teachings of the Christian church? W.K.Clifford suggested that God would deny heaven to those who followed Pascal’s wager on the basis that faith should be founded upon trust and morality, not self gain. Pascal might have responded that true belief would arise from the habit of religion i.e. baptism, mass, prayer etc. However, this is contradicted somewhat by his opinion that one’s relationship with God should be somewhat deeper. â€Å"It is the heart which pe rceives God and not reason.† Furthermore, Pascal’s definition of faith appears to ignore the recognition of God’s immanence and His affect on our everyday lives. William James (1842-1910) found Pascal’s proposition that we can change our beliefs by an act of will entirely ridiculous. He claimed solidly that our beliefs are contingent i.e. each new belief is connected to the previous one. He does agree however that it is rational to sustain a belief even without sufficient evidence given certain circumstances. The first circumstance is where the evidence is indeterminate between two beliefs i.e. favours neither option. The second circumstance is if we are faced with a genuine option i.e. one that is living, forced and momentous. By living James means one that is a reality, as opposed to a dead option, that whilst theoretically possible, isn’t actually going to happen e.g. a devout Catholic supporting the gay pride movement. A forced option is one that cannot be avoided, e.g. choosing whether to go to school or to have a lie in when your alarm goes off at 7:30. A momentous option is one that is unique and irreversible e.g. joining the army – as opposed to a trivial option which is reversible and one that happens regularly throughout life. James states that it is therefore sometimes rational to believe in God without sufficient evidence if the choice is a genuine option. He disputes Pascal’s wager as necessarily being a genuine option as it is not necessarily forced (one could deny the possibility of going to hell) nor is it necessarily living (one might be a devout follower of a different religion). However, he does accept that for a person who perceives the evidence as indeterminate and is already open to belief in God, Pascal’s wager might succeed in tipping the scales and getting them to make that leap of faith. James does believe however that faith can in some instances be a genuine option, and a decision that involves seizing the opportunity and taking a risk. He states that when faced with a genuine option and without sufficient evidence, making a decision will then reveal the evidence to us. For example, one cannot be sure of a stranger’s kindness until they have decided to trust the stranger and give them a chance. Similarly, by making a leap of faith in God, the definitive truth will be later revealed by eschatological verification. However, natural theologians such as Aquinas would certainly dispute James’ claim that the evidence is indeterminate, for the cosmological, teleological, moral and experiential arguments – whilst inconclusive – can be extremely persuasive. Furthermore, like Pascal, he seems to ignore faith as an acceptation of God’s immanence and active presence in our lives. The version of faith held by Aquinas, Plantinga, Pascal and James is propositional in that they all claim that faith about believes in God’s objective existence. However, faith can also be seen existentially as an attitude incorporating God subjectively into the believer’s life. For instance, when I say â€Å"I believe that murder is wrong† or â€Å"I believe in free speech† I am not stating anything about existence, but rather about my commitment towards certain values. H.H.Price (1899-1985) claimed that the statement â€Å"I believe in God† is similar to this in that it is a way of perceiving the world using certain values. â€Å"to see oneself as a created, dependent creature, receiving life and well being from a higher source†¦the only appropriate attitude is one of grateful worship and obedience.† – John Hick. To conclude; each of the arguments examined above vary in their relationship with reason, but what they all have in common is that faith is central to the believer and must work independently of reason to some degree. Some of the arguments incorporate reason, some reject it entirely, but the transcendent nature of God can never be proved, can never be indubitable, for faith is an integral part of religion. Perhaps then natural theology is not trying to prove God’s existence to the point where faith is cast out and certainty resides in its place, but rather it is merely trying to explore God’s nature. â€Å"I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand† – St. Anselm (1033-1109) Proslogian 1. Natural theology could therefore be seen as an expression of faith, rather than a foundation for it. The majority of theists argue that faith is necessary, for if God proved himself to us, we would no longer have free will over our belief and so would be robots without dignity. On the other hand, surely God in His omnipotence could find some way of maintaining our freedom whilst simultaneously providing us certainty of his love? Why not give certainty to the millions of His helpless and suffering children who have lost faith; for where is their dignity? Assess the Role of Faith in Supporting Religious Belief. (2017, Sep 13).

Eriksons stage of evelopemnt (Ego Integrity vs Despair) Article

Eriksons stage of evelopemnt (Ego Integrity vs Despair) - Article Example This psychosocial stage has specific characteristics that explain late adulthood behavior. According to Erickson’s theory, the ego integrity versus despair is a crisis that involves deepened mental engagements (Carducci, 2006). The individual in this stage reflects on the past. They consider the impacts of the decisions they made during the earlier stages of development. The ego of an individual develops when the individuals reflect of the choices they made earlier in their development (Newman, 2012). Ego integrity occurs when the individual reflects on the past decisions of earlier developmental stages as pleasant. In this case, the individual celebrates his/her life through the mentorships and developments they have accomplished to other people. Ego integrity is therefore pleasurable (Carducci, 2006). The individuals perceive their lives as complete. In the case of the deceased client, ego integrity is unattainable to him. Reflection of his life shows sadness and misfortune through the sicknesses within his family, and also his unfulfilled career. In despair, the individual reflects on the life they have lived and they experience a sense of incompleteness (Newman, 2012). The failures in achievement tend to dominate their thoughts and reflections during this stage of their life. They realize that time has lapsed and they lack control to many situations (Newman, 2012). Therefore, their thoughts are directed towards what cannot be modified and rectified in their old age. Consequently, the individual manifests feelings of anger and intense bitterness (Fry, 1989). The case client in the nursing home may be suffering from despair. He might not have the wisdom to negotiate through the crisis. This case client will undergo despair due to the incomplete feeling upon the reflection of his

Comparison of Arguments in their Effectiveness Essay

Comparison of Arguments in their Effectiveness - Essay Example Men often seek uncomplicated solutions to problems as well as useful advice while women often try to institute intimacy by making a discussion of problems and getting concerned in order to strengthen connections. According to Macaulay and Rafelman, the styles of speech that men and women use to converse have been depicted as "debate vs. relate", "report vs. rapport, or "competitive vs. cooperative". In fact, Rafelman shows that men and women view the world very differently and this is because of not only their gender and physical characteristics, but also because of the way that they are raised. For a long time, it has been known that the two sexes think and make decisions differently and this is the reason why they are good at the diverse roles that they undertake, and this includes matters concerning language. What a man is good at doing and the way he does it is not the exact way that a woman would do it. There has been a lot of debate concerning this matter, with some, such as Ma caulay, believing that to believe that women see the world differently from men is being sexist. Rafelman on the other hand, believes otherwise, and they attribute these differences in attitude to the fact that men and women were created differently and these differences were meant to serve specific purposes. The fact that there are differences between the characteristics of men and women is an indication of the way in which they communicate with others within the society. Men and women have extremely different ways of dealing with speech especially in stressful situations and these show just how dissimilar their worldview is. Despite the fact that the circumstances leading to a stressful situation may be similar between the two sexes, the way the respond to it is often quite different and this is often manifested in the way that they communicate. For example, men tend to become moody and brood over the situations, and more often than not, they end up picking up fights with the peop le in their lives. Furthermore, men are more likely to prefer remaining alone until such a time as they feel better before needing any company. This is not the case with women who, when dealing with stressful situations, often seek the company of their friends and family with whom to converse so that they can help them deal with the situation. Therefore, it can be said that while men are often aggressive in their speech when in a stressful situation, preferring to be alone, women on the other hand prefer to deal with the situation with the help of the people they love. Men and women view the world differently through the use of new technology in the daily activities; one of the findings is that men use the internet more often on a daily basis as compared to the women. In reality, men prefer doing practical things like paying bills online instead of physically doing the payments. On the contrary, women will prefer handling bills physically, and when searching for something online, th ey are likely to view broad range of sources of information. Instead of searching information online using a variety of search engines, they would do the searching using the sources they trust would give them what they are looking for, these are often limited in number which is attributed to the fact that women have a less probability of trusting as compared to men when it comes to practical issues. Men would use the internet tools frequently for various