Faith and Doubt at the Cry of Dereliction: a Defense of Doxasticism
Doxasticism is the view that propositional faith that p entails belief that p. This view has recently come under fire within analytic philosophy of religion. One common objection is that faith is compatible with doubt in a way that belief is not. One version of this objection, recently employed by B...
Главный автор: | |
---|---|
Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
Язык: | Английский |
Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
Опубликовано: |
2022
|
В: |
Sophia
Год: 2022, Том: 61, Выпуск: 2, Страницы: 253-265 |
Другие ключевые слова: | B
Belief
B Non-doxasticism B Doxasticism B Faith B Doubt |
Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Итог: | Doxasticism is the view that propositional faith that p entails belief that p. This view has recently come under fire within analytic philosophy of religion. One common objection is that faith is compatible with doubt in a way that belief is not. One version of this objection, recently employed by Beth Rath (International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 81, 161-169, 2017), is to use a particular story, in this case Jesus Christ’s cry of dereliction, to argue that someone had propositional faith while ceasing to believe. Thus, doxasticism is false. Rath’s approach of analyzing a case from scripture has the advantage of allowing her to provide evidence for the claim that a subject had propositional faith but lost belief. However, I argue that Rath faces a dilemma: on the interpretation of the passage necessary for her argument, either Christ did lose his propositional faith that God was with him, or else he did not lose his belief that God was with him. Either way, she must reject a key premise in her argument. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1873-930X |
Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Sophia
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s11841-020-00814-4 |