Blaise Pascal: Should I "Wager" that he was a man of our time?

[2PhiloVoid]

That makes sense. Kierkegaard took Pascal's "thoughts" and fleshed them out, so to speak.

Yes, I tend to think so; and neither gentleman thought that the epistemological efforts of any one person could achieve 'faith' by purely rational means .................................. alone.

Then again, neither of them thought that 'faking it till you make it' was how a person could come to faith, either. They were both too pessimistic for that notion. Yet surprisingly, they both get tagged with that notion all the time.

 

[public hermit]

again, neither of them thought that 'faking it till you make it' was how a person could come to faith, either.

No? How would you characterize Kierkegaard's leap of faith? It's not a leap based on a well reasoned conclusion. I mean, he definitely didn't like the idea of a state religion where you're essentially born a Christian, lol. But, does one leap before "making it"? I don't know.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That makes sense. Kierkegaard took Pascal's "thoughts" and fleshed them out, so to speak.

What do you think about how Pascal (and Kierkegaard) often gets tagged with the notion that he supported "fake it till you make it" to faith? Is this an accurate way to interpret Pascal?

 

[public hermit]

What do you think about how Pascal (and Kierkegaard) often gets tagged with the notion that he supported "fake it till you make it" to faith? Is this an accurate way to interpret Pascal?

Check out the post right above yours.

I'm asking you, haha.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No? How would you characterize Kierkegaard's leap of faith? It's not a leap based on a well reasoned conclusion. I mean, he definitely didn't like the idea of a state religion where you're essentially born a Christian, lol. But, does one leap before "making it"? I don't know.

Where Kierkegaard is concerned, I'd say you've hit upon the billion dollar question, PH!

How would I characterize Kierkegaard's leap of faith? I think I'd characterize this leap as an existential commitment catalyzed by a kind of 'second order' level realization, all done in the face of the epistemological ramifications that come from attempting to deal with the quandry of G.E. Lessing's "Ugly Ditch."

In other words, with 2,000 years of distance between us today and the origination of the Christian faith along with the setting down in writing of the initial teachings held among the earliest 1st century Christians, we're at a point now where even if we think that the New Testament documents we have are 'historically true,' this often isn't enough by which for us to have epistemological certainty about Jesus and thereby provide us a faith that is born of 'certainty.' With this shortfall, we're often skeptical and unwilling to live out our faith with long-term confidence. So, we have to transcend this lack of assurance, this lack of in-our-face relationship with God by having a kind of willingness to move ahead anyway.

Of course, there's more to it than this, but this is perhaps the best I can do in summarizing what Kierkegaard ironically punches at in his Concluding Unscientific Postscript.

 

[public hermit]

Concluding Unscientific Postscript

Is that where he argues that even if you were a disciple of Jesus, seeing him work day in and day out, that's still not a guarantee you would come to faith? (That might be in Philosophical Fragments).

I think I'd characterize this leap as an existential commitment catalyzed by a kind of 'second order' level realization

So, it's not wholly bereft of content, I guess? Is the second order realization a sense that it might be true, true enough to make the leap?

In other words, with 2,000 years of distance between us today and the origination of the Christian faith along with the setting down in writing some of the initial teaching among the earliest 1st century Christians, we're at a point now where even if we think that the New Testament documents we have are 'historically true,' that often isn't enough by which for us to have epistemological certainty about Jesus and thereby have a faith that is born of 'certainty' and won we're willing to live out with confidence. So, we have to transcend this lack of assurance, this lack of in our face relationship with God by having a kind of willingness to move ahead anyway

Nicely put, Philo. That makes considerable sense. I have a lot of sympathy for this way of looking at it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Is that where he argues that even if you were a disciple of Jesus, seeing him work day in and day out, that's still not a guarantee you would come to faith? (That might be in Philosophical Fragments).

I can't remember at this moment, but you may be correct. Just off the cuff, I can see how this could be the case from what we read in the Gospels and the book of Acts. I'll have to track down where Kierkegaard discusses this pertinent point you've brought up, PH.

So, it's not wholly bereft of content, I guess? Is the second order realization a sense that it might be true, true enough to make the leap?

Nope. It's not bereft of content. And I'd say that the second order realization Kierkegaard avers comes in understanding the ironic position of the Subjective observer who attempts to handle the Objective world of Reality, all the while realizing that he is a but a partial observer who is aware of his own cognitive and time-bounded limits... and due to this, wouldn't be able to ever connect a full-blown Strong Foundationalist style [horse?] of justification up to a certainly justified belief [cart?] in Christian Theology.

Nicely put, Philo. That makes considerable sense. I have a lot of sympathy for this way of looking at it.

In some respects, it has some similarity to the Reformed sentiments but remains heavy on the dosage of Existential wondering.

However, I'll end that here since this thread is about Pascal rather than Kierkegaard. But as I said, when one reads Pascal, we'll find some similar sentiments, but Pascal leans more than Kierkegaard would on the Prophetic Tradition within the overall History of Church Thought, by which we are to find the locus of Christian Truth. (Of course, since you've read the Pensees, I'm sure you're already well aware this ... )

 

[2PhiloVoid]

All glasses are full. One half water, one half air.

Lol! Very true. Kind of.