نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دکتری فلسفه دین، گروه فلسفه دین، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 گروه فلسفه دین، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This study analyzes pragmatic arguments in two distinct models of faith: first, the doxastic approach (as seen in the accounts of Pascal and James), and second, the non-doxastic approach (as developed by Golding). When the evidence for a religious proposition is insufficient, both approaches consider faith a rational venture. Doxastic venture accounts claim that faith entails belief formed through the will. However, since this approach relies on direct doxastic voluntarism, it faces significant psychological and epistemological challenges. In contrast, Golding’s pragmatic model of faith, grounded in the non-doxastic approach, attempts to show that faith can be realized without belief, through an action-guiding assumption. On this model, faith can coexist with deep doubt, avoiding the challenges faced by the doxastic account. Although both models emphasize practical rationality and venture in situations of doubt, they differ in the necessity of belief for faith. The article also concludes that the non-doxastic approach to faith, in epistemically uncertain conditions, can serve as a promising alternative to the traditional doxastic model.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)