A Pascal-type Justification of Faith in a Scientific Age

Abstract

The author argues that faith survives as a rational option, despite science rendering improbable distinctively theological claims about the world and history. After rejecting justifications of faith from natural theology and natural law, he defends a seemingly weaker strategy, a corrected version of Pascal's wager argument. The wager lets one's desires count toward showing one's faith to be rational, and the faith requires that oneÕs desires undergo radical transformation to protect the faith, making the wager argument really quite strong. As Nietzsche insisted, to be an atheist in the face of this challenge, one would have to become superhuman and transform one's values radically in the opposite direction.

Analysis of faith

“…Falk () has it that two components that partly constitute faith are actions. The first is the “decision to convert mere belief to religious faith,” of which Falk declares “it's a voluntary action” and that “it's analogous to wagering.” For Falk, having faith starts with belief, so one can't manufacture faith just by intending to have it.…”