• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Asses the view that it is rational to believe that there is a God

Extracts from this document...


Asses the view that it is rational to believe that there is a God Rational: To be rational is to think logically and within reason. To base your thoughts on evidence, and then use that evidence to come to a "rational" conclusion. Motivation: To be motivated to do or think something, normally the motivation will be because it will benefit you in the long run. Many philosophers use theses types of words when talking about whether or not it is rational to believe in god. Pascal for instance thinks that you should believe in God as you will gain more from it when you pass away if he does exist, i.e. going to heaven, whereas if you don't believe in God and it turns out he does in fact exists you will lose more. This is often referred to as Pascal's wager and Pascal is a prudentialist, which means believing in something because it's in your own interests. Another argument for the belief in God is Fideism, this is where you believe in God because it is absurd not to. ...read more.


Kierkegaard thinks that reasons are irrelevant to religious faith and that you should believe blindingly. Kierkegaard's whole point is that this is to narrow conception of rationality; it's too limited to have anything substantial to say abut religious belief. Again an argument against this is that truth is an objective matter, my belief in God can only be said to be true if and only if there is a God. Whether or not there is a God is something that is independent of my believing or not believing that there is a God. These philosophers have all come up with substantial and plausible arguments for why it is "rational" to believe in God, there are two philosophers that I am going to look at next who would disagree. Flew is an atheist and believes in falsification that you do not truly believe in something unless you are willing to agree to what is false about it, that to actually believe in something you have to see what could be false about it and not believe blindingly. ...read more.


I think that it is clearly not rational to believe there is a God because there is too much counter evidence i.e. the fact that no one has ever seen him, you cannot check religious experience to see if that person is actually experiencing God or its just a hallucination, there fact that there are many more conceivable arguments for how the world begun that have a lot more evidence behind them. There fore I agree with Flew and think it is absurd to believe in someone who has so much evidence to say there not true. How can you believe in something that could be a myth? How can you believe something that has so much evidence against it? I think that Kierkegaard, plantinga and Pascal have come up with very good and reasonable arguments but they are missing a lot of evidence and rational thought, because they believe in God them self's there belief could be getting in the way of them seeing the amount of counter evidence there actually is to say God doesn't exist. Marie Thomson Paul Sperring ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. T H E D E S I G N A R ...

    Hume is here attacking the inductive logic once more. The leap from an observation in this world does not justify a metaphysical conclusion about the creation of the world, of this we have no experience. How could a goldfish in a pond conclude anything about the process of pond making?

  2. 'An analysis of arguments for the existence of God will result in valid philosophical ...

    there is no something at all, and we cannot claim anything about it. Existence is surely more than a feature of a thing or being, it is fundamental to whether it is. Kant observed that existence is not associated with the definition of something since it does not add to our understanding of that thing.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work