This document discusses different views on the relationship between faith, reason, and religious belief. It outlines Pascal's wager argument that it is reasonable to have faith in God due to the risk of infinite punishment for non-belief. Criticisms of Pascal's argument are presented, including that it appeals to self-interest rather than truth, and assumes only one possible God. The role of faith in supporting religious belief is complex, with some seeing faith as leading to unjustified beliefs, while others see faith and reason as both having important but different roles to play.

1. Faith and Motivation for Belief

2. The Nature of Belief
It is important to understand what is meant by the
word belief. In everyday speech to say ‘I believe
something is true’ is often understood as meaning ‘I
believe that it is probably true’. However, taken in a
more precise sense, the word’ belief’ means ‘I have a
conviction that it is true’.
However, conviction of belief does not necessarily
come as a result of logical argument. Belief may come
about by deductive argument, by inductive argument,
by personal experience or even by sheer blind personal
acceptance and prejudice.

3. Rational vs. Irrational Beliefs
A rational belief is defined as that which has
evidence to count towards it. The essential foundation
of rationality is that it should be based on evidence.
Evidence should indicate that the truth of the belief is more
likely than not, and more likely than alternative
propositions.
An irrational belief can be described as:
1. A belief for which the person has no evidence whatsoever
2. Which conflicts with or contradicts, other well grounded
beliefs that are held.
3. For which the person claims that there could never be
evidence.

4. Definitions
Belief – in: A belief that conveys an attitude of trust
or commitment
Belief – that: A belief that claims to be an objective
fact
Fideism: The view that certain beliefs are beyond the
scope of reason and must be accepted on faith.
Key issue: What is the relationship of reason and
evidence to religious faith and belief?

5. Pascal’s Wager
Pascal argued that God could not be known
through argument and evidence. He did not see
religious belief as cold, intellectual judgment (belief-
that), but rather as emotional, intuitive and passionate
(belief –in).
He developed was has become known as Pascal’s
Wager. He argued that it was sound judgment to
act as though there existed a God who grants
eternal happiness to those who sincerely
believe in him.

6. Pascal’s Wager
The essence of Pascal’s argument is the idea that it
is unreasonable to be an atheist. Pascal’s weighs up
not only the possible outcomes (eternal life, damnation and
nothing), but also the concept of finite vs. infinite. To
Pascal, the pleasure of earthly life cannot be reasonably
compared to the risk of infinite punishment. He
emphasizes the aspect of risk involved.
This argument is best understood in the form of an
appeal to self-interest (motivation for belief)
rather than to the truth of God.
The appeal to self- interest is a consideration for
‘motivation for belief’.

7. Criticisms
Needless to say, many have questioned the logic of
Pascal’s arguments.
In pairs, outline the main objections to his argument.

8. Criticism 1
— An obvious objection to the wager is that it is
powerless against someone who does not
care about the long term consequences of their
actions.

9. Criticism 2
— The appeal to self-interest is misplaced. Belief
in God should come from a place of goodness, not
due to selfish reasons.
— William James argued that God has the knowledge
and power to reject those who believe in him as a
result of ‘mechanical calculation’. Surely God would
not make it so easy for people.
Pascal’s counter to this……. The human condition
(human nature) is entirely based on self-interest.

10. Criticism 3
— An objection to the wager is offered by Mackie. He
argues that ‘to try to make oneself believe in God
when one does not, is to lack intellectual
integrity’. It is a form of self deception.

11. Criticism 4
— The most widely accepted objection to Pascal's argument
is called the ‘many gods objection’. Pascal offers the
choice of two options- belief in the God of traditional
Christian faith who rewards believers and punishes
atheists, or nothing.
— The problem is that Pascal assumes that we are ignorant
as to the existence of God, therefore how can he rightfully
claim that only one God (and in the form that he
imagines him) exists.
— Pascal offers only a very specific version of God and this
conflicts with his insistence that we neither know
whether God exists or not.

12. Questions
1. Explain Pascal’s wager in your own words (you
could also draw a diagram to help demonstrate the
argument).
2. Explain the idea that Pascal’s argument fails to
persuade someone who is not concerned with long-
term consequences.
3. Describe and explain the ‘many gods’ objection to
Pascal.

13. Assess the role of faith in supporting religious
belief.
In order to answer this question you should discuss a variety of
views with critical analysis (offer an evaluation, which means a
judgment).
A negative view of the role of faith would see faith
leading to beliefs that were without justification or
even irrational. In this view, faith would be seen to have little
value and the emphasis would be on reason. This could be
contrasted with the view that sees faith as taking
precedence over reason. Indeed some religious beliefs may
be deemed to be beyond our reasoning and so require faith.
However, it could also be argued that both faith and
reason have an important role to play in religious
belief. Faith is supported by reason and is necessary to move
the believer from the merely intellectual assent, to a
commitment and trust in God.