Deck 10: Faith and Reason

Question 1

The irrationalist position was held by both David Hume and Søren Kierkegaard.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

Both John Calvin and Karl Barth believed that faith, being transrational, is higher than reason.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Thomas Aquinas was an example of an incompatibilist.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

In Pascal's wager there is not even a finite gain to be had in not believing in God and there is nothing lost in believing in God.

Question 5

W. K. Clifford argued that believing has moral ramifications.

Question 6

The text described James's position as direct volitionalism.

Question 7

The text described Søren Kierkegaard's religious position as "one of history's most brutal attacks on existentialism."

Question 8

Søren Kierkegaard thought that one's faith ought to be adjusted in the light of the latest scholarship.

Question 9

Pascal's advice to those who find themselves incapable of believing is

A) don't worry about it for your actions are more important than your beliefs.
B) go back over the philosophical proofs for God until your reason is convinced.
C) accept the fact that you were not destined to be a religious person.
D) hang around those who believe, act as if you believe, and belief will naturally happen to you.

Question 10

William James's story of the mountain climber was meant to illustrate the principle that

A) when we have insufficient evidence, we should not act.
B) there are cases where faith creates its own verification.
C) in every case we should make a leap of faith if we are inclined to do so.
D) faith in God is not a risky leap because it is grounded in solid, objective, rational evidence.

Question 11

The text criticized James's position by suggesting that

A) it is impossible to will ourselves to believe a proposition.
B) it will not convince the atheist for whom religious belief is not a live, optional hypothesis.
C) there are too many different religious options to know which one merits our faith.
D) there is sufficient evidence concerning religious issues such that faith of any sort is unnecessary.

Question 12

The position that holds that objective reason is simply inappropriate for religious belief is called

A) volitionalism.
B) natural theology.
C) fideism.
D) agnosticism.

Question 13

Søren Kierkegaard's position on faith and reason could be summarized as

A) religion within the limits of reason alone.
B) reason within the limits of religion alone.
C) religion and reason within the limits of universal morality alone.
D) religion and reason as two, co-equal partners in the quest for the same truth.

Question 14

Kierkegaard said that the individual comes into relation with God when the individual's

A) passion is brought to the point of despair.
B) moral behavior is brought into conformity with God's law.
C) reason is convinced that religious belief is rational.
D) calculations of the possible costs and rewards demonstrate that religious belief is the best wager.

Question 15

In discussing the merits of religious rationalism and fideism, the text pointed out that

A) rationalism has the advantage that it has been held by the majority of philosophers.
B) fideism has the advantage that it has been held by the majority of religious persons.
C) the rationalist has the advantage that his or her evidence can be publicly discussed and evaluated.
D) the fideist has the advantage that his or her postion is self-authenticating and carries its own evidence with it.

Question 16

Explain why Pascal thinks religious belief is reasonable at the same time he believes it cannot be justified through a rational argument.

Question 17

What are some objections that could be raised against Pascal's argument by both religious believers as well as nonbelievers.

Question 18

How would W. K. Clifford respond to Pascal, James, and Kierkegaard?

Question 19

In what situations would James say that believing without sufficient evidence is reasonable and when is it not reasonable?

Question 20

Why does Kierkegaard say that faith must go beyond reason and even against it? How might a critic respond to his position?