Faith and religion Essay

Strong relationship between faith and religion, which existed in the past, has currently transformed into some form of competition, when both of these spheres are rivals in human minds. The major distinction between philosophy and religion is their approach to reaching the truth: while faith generally supposes accepting something as axiomatically true, philosophy enables an individual to come to conclusions through logical thinking. However, in ancient times philosophical thinking was intertwined with religious assumptions, and the very idea of faith implied personal reflection and search for universal truth (Harris 38). With the advent of Christianity, the need for individual reflection was replaced by the figure of Christ and the idea of salvation. The path of reaching salvation, which required self-development and self-perfection in ancient times (for example, according to the beliefs of stoics, buddhists etc.), was transformed to a set of rules and behaviors in Christianity (Harris 45). After the separation of religion and philosophy, many philosophers were trying to realize the concept of faith using methods and approaches of philosophy. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the concepts of faith developed by Blaise Pascal and Soren Kierkegaard, and to discuss the reasons why people should rely on faith and the process how an individual comes to faith.
Pascal’s view on faith
Blaise Pascal was a prominent French mathematician, philosopher and inventor; he lived in the 1600s, and the second part of his life was strongly devoted to theology and philosophy, rather than to science and research. Pascal has been a loyal Catholic during all his life, and his perceptions of faith and religion were centered around Christian religion.
Pascal introduced a concept of wager (or gambit), the main idea of which is the following: even though an individual cannot logically determine the existence (or inexistence) of God, it is most reasonable to act as though this individual has faith (Jordan 27). The citation from Pascal’s “Pensees” clearly illustrates his reasoning with regard to faith:
“You must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.” (Jordan 31).
Thus, according to Pascal, people should rely on faith because it is a safe bet, and if an individual behaves as if he has faith and leads a modest Christian life, he can gain the eternity as a result of decent living – and can lose nothing but certain indulgent pleasures of life. One of the bravest ideas of Pascal is that individuals can choose faith basing on logical reasoning, and they can come to acquire faith using everyday practical approach. Pascal associated faith with the way of living, and stated that choosing to live as a religious person (i.e. praying, attending church, following the commandments) represents an act of commitment to God (Jordan 120).
The critics of Pascal have addressed the major weak points of this logic. First of all, the possibility of existence of multiple deities nullifies the major Pascal’s reasoning. Secondly, many philosophers stated that a divine essence would easily distinguish between true faith and Pascal’s wager, which might not be a wholehearted faith. Despite these questionable aspects of Pascal’s reasoning, his practical approach to religion and faith is very similar to 21-century pragmatic and choice-focused world outlook.
Kierkegaard’s view on faith
Soren Kierkegaard, a prominent philosopher, theologian and psychologist, lived in Denmark in the 1800s, was even called the “Christian Socrates” (Carlisle 63), for his works on Christian ethics and attachment to Socratic methods. Most works of Kierkegaard are devoted to subjective perception of reality by the individual. One of such works is the famous “Truth Is Subjectivity” in “Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments”, written in the name of a fictitious character Johannes Climacus (Carlisle 65). Regarding religious views of Kierkegaard, it is important to note that he considered the faith in Jesus Christ as the only path to salvation.
Kierkegaard makes a distinction between objective and subjective knowledge: objective knowledge is theoretical and dispassionate, while personal (subjective) knowledge is passionate and practical (Carlisle 70). Soren Kierkegaard is considered one of the founders of existentionalism, and defines this concept in the following way: “knowledge has a relationship to the knower, who is essentially an existing individual, and that for this reason all essential knowledge is essentially related to existence” (Harris 176). According to this point of view, every individual is a subjective thinker, and the idea of faith is not in what someone believes, but how someone believes.
The definition of truth developed by Kierkegaard is “An objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness is the truth, the highest truth attainable for an existing individual” (Carlisle 92). He states that in order to have faith, an individual should first of all become subjective, to be able to be “in the truth”. Thus, according to Kierkegaard, someone should arrive to a subjective mindset and understand the subjective essence of truth, and should be able to reach “passionate inwardness” (Carlisle 89). From this point of view, being passionately attached to some false idea is better than detached persuasion of an objectively true idea. Faith and religion, from Kierkegaard’s point of view, result in paradoxes between objective and subjective truths, and the only right way to treat such paradoxes is to perceive them with passionate inwardness.
Kierkegaard developed an interesting view on how people come to faith: leading an objective life make the existence of an individual depend purely on probabilities and accidents; and there is no idea or sense of living for such a person. But the individual who chose subjective life finds own subjective truth, the idea which is worth living, and in this subjective truth he might arrive to passionate inwardness, i.e. faith.
Comparison
Philosophies of faith developed by Pascal and Kierkegaard both have similarities and distinctions. Both of them stated that beliefs in Gods are determined by individual faith, and that an individual can choose whether to believe or not, whether to have faith or not. Kierkegaard, as well as Pascal, emphasized the importance of the way how the individual believes compared to the object of belief.
Pascal came to the conclusion that people should rely on faith because it is the position of “best win”, although his reasoning was far more subtle than simply “winning” the game. According to Pascal, regardless of the fact of God’s existence, it is more beneficial for an individual to live a decent life. Kierkegaard, on the contrary, showed that people who do not rely on faith come to the existence which is deprived of sense and leading idea, which is simply mechanical passing from day to day. Although both philosophers state that it’s better to have faith than not to have, Pascal’s reasoning is based on comparison of the possible benefits, while Kierkegaard focuses on the depth and diversity of individual existence. The focus of Pascal’s considerations is on possible future, while Kierkegaard concentrates on individual being here and now.
With regard to faith, Pascal and Kierkegaard have rather opposite views. According to Pascal, obeying a set of rules and commandments is already an act of commitment. From Kierkegaard’s point of view, the belief is not in the external world or behaviour, but inside a person, and the state of inwardness and devotion is a manifestation of faith rather than ostentatious public actions. In Pascal’s model of faith, it is possible to pretend to believe, while in Kierkegaard’s model no pretending is possible.
There are both similarities and differences in the processes of acquiring faith, from Kierkegaard’s and Pascal’s points of view. On one hand, their concepts of arriving to faith are the opposites: according to Pascal faith is acquired when a person decides to lead a decent Christian life and obey the regulations, and for Kierkegaard real subjective faith could only be acquired through going outside the limits of reason and possibility, and wholeheartedly admitting the impossible. However, both philosophers admit that faith is something an individual can choose, and has to re-choose during the whole course of life. Thus, Kierkegaard has a more mystical and existential approach to faith and religion, while Pascal implemented a more practical outlook based on logical reasoning. However, both researchers believed that belief in God is a matter of personal choice, and this choice is continuously performed and confirmed by an individual.