宗教と哲学

最近キルケゴールの随筆を読書しています。客観とキリスト教に関する課題です。
Kierkegaard makes an interesting point about the impossibility of maintaining an objective stance when discussing the truth behind religious doctrine. Basically, he indicates that attempting to justify the Bible scientifically undermines the faith which the text endeavors to imbue the reader with. Even if a philological argument demonstrates that the text is authentic, no proof that eternal happiness can be gained by heeding its words is possible. In fact, the need for such a logical justification indicates a weakening of faith. Kierkegaard indicates that religious faith entails a personal decision to believe in the absence of understanding. However, he does not address the metaphysical problem of whether such an inherently subjective belief is justifiable.
This matter is taken up by Blaise Pascal in his paper, "The Wager". He indicates that:
1. All people must wager whether or not there is a God.
2. Wagering that there is a God is a rational bet.
However, he does not go into detail about why agnosticism is not an option. This seems to assume that humans cannot live without some conception of eternity. Kierkegaard's point that belief is a form of ultimate risk, of martyrdom, is interesting. This would seem to make a short-term outlook more rational. As belief in a long-term future can serve only to isolate oneself in a risk which would seem to be torturous, simply foregoing anything which falls beyond the horizon of reasonable probability seems wiser. If any interests can be used to destroy you, the option of simply mimicking stable existences without any form of belief would seem optimal. Of course, this belies an intense interest in survival.
矛盾がそんな簡単に終わりません。