Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This age-old question, which has baffled many philosophers, is also known as a causality dilemma. For the ancient philosophers, this quandary birthed thoughts of where life and the universe began. In St. Anselm’s Proslogium, he presents what at first seems to be a nearly identical question, but in actuality is not a causality dilemma. While the chicken or the egg causality dilemma possesses many murky areas, St. Anselm’s query encompasses a clearly defined answer. Recurrently, Anselm states that belief must come before understanding. He declares, “For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, - that unless I believed, I should not understand.” Thus, the question arises: Which comes first, belief or understanding? While many agree with the stance that Anselm takes of credo ut intelligam and fides quaerens intellectum , others have valid objections. Yet, profound significance rests within this question; for from this question springs a plethora of others. For example, can one have blind faith in Christ? Can the concept of God be explained through reason? Or is He ineffable? If God can be defined by steps and propositions, does one lose the element of faith? As one delves deeper into this question, one will discover that faith indeed comes before understanding.
Therefore, belief must come before understanding, for faith is a pre-requisite to reason. What incentive does one have to understand, if he does not first believe? One must possess a small seed of conviction in God before he can comprehend the fullness of God; it is imperative to understanding. Some protest that one has no motivation towards belief if he does not u...
... middle of paper ...
... others told her. She faithfully waited and finally came to understand the reasons behind Odysseus’ ten year delay. Sometimes, understanding does not immediately occur after belief. For instance, when one puts his trust in Christ, he will learn incrementally who God is discover more about His great nature. One continues to learn and comprehend more and more over time after he has put his faith in God. As Anselm continues to expound on his argument on the existence of God, the answer is evident. Faith must come before understanding for if it did not, what incentive is there to reason?
Works Cited
St. Anselm, Proslogium Pg.53, Chapter 1
I believe that I may understand
Faith seeking understanding
The Bible 2 Tim. 2:13 English Standard Version
St. Anselm, Proslogium Pg. 53, Ch. 2
Ibid., Pg. 66, Ch. 14
Homer, The Odyssey Line 215-219
Ibid., Line 228b-229
It is crucial that every belief must be thoroughly explored and justified to avoid any future repercussions. Clifford provides two examples in which, regardless of the outcome, the party that creates a belief without comprehensive justification ends up at fault. It is possible to apply the situations in The Ethics of Belief to any cases of belief and end up with the conclusion that justification is of utmost importance. Justifying beliefs is so important because even the smallest beliefs affect others in the community, add to the global belief system, and alter the believer moral compass in future decisions.
Saint Thomas of Aquainas may have been one of the greatest thinkers who attempted to bridge the proverbial gap between faith and reason. His Sacred Doctrine which was the initial part of his Summa Theologica was the basis for his conclusion about the existence of God. Aquinas tended to align his beliefs close with Aristotle's supposition that there must be an eternal and imputrescible creator. In comparison, Anselm's impressions were influenced largely by Plato. In his text Proslogion he outlined his Ontological argument that regarding the existence of God. It was simply that God was the ultimate and most perfect being conceivable, and that his state of existing is greater than not existing therefore god, being perfect in every way, must exist. This is where their paths divide, and although they essentially reach the same determination they paint the picture quite differently.
... reflects the original logos while also maintaining a separate identity, so too must faith be both reflective and inventive. It should strive toward perfection like Reverend Maclean devouring Norman?s papers with a red pen, with the intention of reflecting God?s already established likeness. Yet it must also be careful not to close off unexpected, new avenues, for as Paul demonstrates through his fishing, the most arbitrary human actions can accrue religious resonance. Essentially, human faith faces the ultimate balancing act: it must strive to understand and believe and love all of God and His creation, while at the same time realizing that such complete knowledge is impossible, and that humanity is called to ?love completely without complete understanding? (103).
The book A Prayer for Owen Meany brings forth various themes and questions that can't be answered easily. One of these questions is "Can religious faith exist alongside doubt, or are the two mutually exclusive?" There are several different possible takes on this question may be answered. How a person answers this question is related to their belief in faith.
In Paul Tillich’s 1957 work Dynamics of Faith, he mentions that there are six major components of faith. These six components of faith describe the Franciscan perspective of “faith”. According to Tillich, the first component of faith is “the state of being ultimately concerned”. The second component of faith is that it is supposed to be at the center of all of our personal lives and everything that we do throughout our own individual lives. The third component of faith is that we should have an awareness for “infinite” things such as God himself. The fourth component of faith is that we need to understand that faith can act as fear, fascination, or both of these qualities at the same time. The fifth component of faith is that doubt is a major product that will always exist with faith. The last component of faith is that we need a community in order to have a “language of faith”.
The controversial topic involving the existence of God has been the pinnacle of endless discourse surrounding the concept of religion in the field of philosophy. However, two arguments proclaim themselves to be the “better” way of justifying the existence of God: The Cosmological Argument and the Mystical Argument. While both arguments attempt to enforce strict modus operandi of solidified reasoning, neither prove to be a better way of explaining the existence of God. The downfall of both these arguments rests on commitment of fallacies and lack of sufficient evidence, as a result sabotaging their validity in the field of philosophy and faith.
The Question of God is divided into two parts. The first part, titled: “What Should We Believe” seeks to answer the first half of the questio...
The Ontological Argument, which argues from a definition of God’s being to his existence, is the first type of argument we are going to examine. Since this argument was founded by Saint Anslem, we will be examining his writings. Saint Anslem starts by defining God as an all-perfect being, or rather as a being containing all conceivable perfections. Now if in addition of possessing all conceivable perfections t...
Through my study of Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” and Saint Augustine’s “The Confessions”, I discovered that both text involve a journey of finding real truths before acquiring a faith. This suggests that faith and reason are compatible because one must embark on journey in which they are educated about real truths before they are able to acquire a faith.
For the first precondition, Anselm first claimed that things can exist in the mind or both in mind and reality. Anselm thought that the greatest thing that can be conceived w...
The role of faith has been debated among many theologians, scientists, and philosophers. It has been greatly discussed and depicted throughout history as whether faith is logical when it comes to religion or whether faith is completely absurd. In this essay, I will focus on the role of faith through the lenses of Christian philosophers Sorean Kierkegaard and Paul Tillich. Faith plays an important role in Kierkegaard and Tillich theology; I will critically examine their depiction of faith and compare and contrast their passages. Kiergarrd view of faith is that it is completely absurd where as Ti
A Christian apologetic method is a verbal defense of the biblical worldview. A proof is giving a reason for why we believe. This paper will address the philosophical question of God’s existence from the moral argument. The presuppositional apologetic method of Reformed thinkers Cornelius Van Til and John Frame will be the framework. Topics covered here could undoubtedly be developed in more depth, but that would be getting ahead, here is the big picture.
In today’s modern western society, it has become increasingly popular to not identify with any religion, namely Christianity. The outlook that people have today on the existence of God and the role that He plays in our world has changed drastically since the Enlightenment Period. Many look solely to the concept of reason, or the phenomenon that allows human beings to use their senses to draw conclusions about the world around them, to try and understand the environment that they live in. However, there are some that look to faith, or the concept of believing in a higher power as the reason for our existence. Being that this is a fundamental issue for humanity, there have been many attempts to explain what role each concept plays. It is my belief that faith and reason are both needed to gain knowledge for three reasons: first, both concepts coexist with one another; second, each deals with separate realms of reality, and third, one without the other can lead to cases of extremism.
The rise of Christianity raised questions on how this new mode of thinking, based on faith, could fit and interact with a world that had not based its thinking on faith but instead on human reason. While some rejected that the new and old modes of thinking were compatible, others sought and found ways to reconcile both ways of exploring the world. The traditional philosophical method of starting with assumptions that cannot be proven but are assumed to be true and progressing to conclusions based on those assumptions was applied by both Aquinas and Descartes to address the mutual challenge posed by Christianity and philosophy.
Rene Descartes, a 17th century French philosopher believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. His Discourse on Method (1637) and Meditations (1641) contain his important philosophical theories. Intending to extend mathematical method to all areas of human knowledge, Descartes discarded the authoritarian systems of the scholastic philosophers and began with universal doubt. Only one thing cannot be doubted: doubt itself. Therefore, the doubter must exist. This is the kernel of his famous assertion Cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I am existing). From this certainty Descartes expanded knowledge, step by step, to admit the existence of God (as the first cause) and the reality of the physical world, which he held to be mechanistic and entirely divorced from the mind; the only connection between the two is the intervention of God.