FIDES ET RATIO

April 21, 2008 at 1:11 pm (PURE THOUGHTS)
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

(Fides et Ratio, in other words Faith and Reason. It could be science and religion, or could be the mind and the heart. I wrote this years ago as a ‘pure thoughts’ on one of PJP II’s encyclical letter Fides Et Ratio.)

 

Fides_et_ratioTheir was once a story of a meandering Arabian who was having a respite in his tent, when a man happened to ask him. The man asked, “how do you prove that God exist?” The Arab blatantly answered, “how do I know that a camel or a man passed by my tent last night?”

Obviously what does this peculiar man (Arabian) mean? – it is but a rational notion of the existence of God. That God’s existence is overshadowed in the splendor and majesty of his creations.

Now, what is the noble connection between rational proof and faith? Let me quote for sometime the philosophical ideology of Rev. Fr. Michael Moga as has been clearly stated in his book, In Search of True Religion. I quote…

To affirm that there must be a supreme cause to account for the order in the world does not mean that I have faith, that I commit myself to this supreme cause in trust, obedience and love. Rather, the conclusion of these proofs is a calm, intellectual affirmation that, based in reason, a transcendent cause must exist.1

Clear and bright enough, that reason is not a vain word when we call for the proof of the existence of God. Natural Theology emphasizes that we can know God in two ways; ‘natural’ and ‘supernatural’. The natural knowledge of God gives weight to the “light of reason” (lumen rationes), while the supernatural on the “light of faith”(lumen fedei) and the “beatific vision” (lumen gloriae). By virtue of escalation, the light of reason appears at the last (not bad), primed by the beatific vision and seconded by the light of faith. Further, according to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Fedis et Ratio, faith and reason are like two wings which enables, say for example, a dove to hover and be in balance while on its wings. Such so, that we cannot stifle any of them in search of God. We cannot put off the light of faith to give way for the light of reason to shine, and vice versa. We cannot put the other into inertness in order for the other to subsist. Rather, without the other (or any of them), it is an absurd attempt to know God. We both need faith and reason to know God. Reason needs faith to withstand the awe in standing in front of the Supreme Being. The same is through with faith, it needs reason acknowledge faith in logical sense.

I believe in the indissoluble and in separable marriage of faith and reason, or, of rational proof and faith. Since, after all, what is reason for but to know and to love God (according to the natural theology), as it is the purpose of man’s being. I believe that the purpose of reason is to remind us that we are indebted to know, to acknowledge and love Somebody. Else, we have nothing to be proud of in this world but a demeaning level of beasts.  Though reason works in a limited fashion, as the agent is evidently limited, faith, on the other hand, strikes the other side of the balance to perpetuate their noble purpose – to know and to love God.

At my end, I would like to quote Soren Kierkegaard when he said, that the fullness of my (ones) being is defined by the way I stand before God.       

Leave a Comment

ON BLAISE PASCAL’S GEOMETRICAL NOTION

April 17, 2008 at 1:11 pm (PURE THOUGHTS)
Tags: , , , , , ,

(Caution: contains philosophical jargons and catchphrases that might turn your head or turn the internet explorer back. I have wirtten this circa 2004 of Octorber to fill the void on my prof’s class record. Who likes philosophy anyway?! Huh.)

 

Blaise_pascalPascal, a brilliant philosopher and mathematician is quite disinterested to conclusions, inferences or at least indifferent to it. Precisely, his core in dealing with truth is by demonstration rather than judgment.

Pascal, on the other hand uses his geometry as a sort of methodology on unearthing the truth since this uses fixed definitions or signs. This in contrary to the typical definitions we attribute to things in which it uses terms prone to various definitions. Thus, perfect and irreducible demonstration is impossible since this creates immense webbings of definitions emanating from itself.

However there’s limit to every thing, Pascal’s geometry, by its own nature is incapable to “scale” all things that goes around. There are knowledge that goes beyond the grasp of measurement or scaling. In particular, for me, and, for example, God, is really beyond the scruples of geometry. Geometry, by nature, denotes limitations; from the fact that it uses fixed arguments, definitions and signs. And God would not fit in this notion. What more, metaphysical characters, such as spirits or souls. These are eternal beings that don’t account to time and space (again, another limitations) and, in the same line abhors geometrical configurations.

I would like also to give stress on Pascal’s idea of the vacuum. He said that nature negates vacuum up to a certain point, but perhaps not absolutely. No matter in what degree is our brainstorming, practically, I believe that vacuum do exist, that if we are talking of space to be filled (the absence of air, temperature and other substances). But, with vacuum negating space, I don’t think so. For it is impossible to think of space, as a whole, being increased or being reduced or worse, being taken away if we are to come up with nothing. As is said in his exposition, space is that which has parts outside another. If we are to reduce space, where are we to begin? If we are to increased it, up to what extent, if our concern is to arrive to the indivisible or the boundary?

I like Pascal’s own “epoche”. He said, “instead of denying a proposition because we cannot realize its meaning, we should withhold judgment and examine the contrary proposition carefully.” This quit essential to a man looking for truth, while it is true that “the only permanent thing here on earth is change”. The truth today might be a lie tomorrow. What is pleasing this moment might be taboo at the other juncture. That’s why suspension of judgment is quite crucial.

Finally, Pascal’s pilgrimage for truth rested on faith. Thus, “when reason ceases, faith enters.” Faith is the best counselor of a troubled mind and heart. He added, “The heart has its own reason that our mental faculty cannot grasp”. With the diversity of philosophy, which makes truth near because of its noble persuasion on our humanity, and yet so far because of contradictions and bitter combats of ideas, we are indeed in dread of pandimonic confusions. However, we have to bear in mind what Saint Augustine said, “Before we can understand the truth, we first have to believe.”

Leave a Comment