soren kierkegaard
...arguments such as that of design, or ontological. Kierkegaard was not interested in rationality, even though he tried to rationally proof god’s existence. Leap of Faith is the best attempted justification to people’s beliefs and god’s existence. Now, I am not saying that people do not believe in a great creator (on the contrary, they belief in him) but blind faith is a lot more profound. It is an inexplicable force of nature to believe and trust in an almighty being, in destiny, redemption, and the rewarding heavens. Personally, god cannot be rationally justified or proven to exist. But I know that if we do something wrong, against others, or ourselves it will scar our conscious and subconscious forever. To have the constant reminder that unjustified wrongdoing is forever present can deteriorate that person’s livelihood, and that,is a personal god, that will haunt us forever. I must admit that most of the philosophers we have studied so far have presented us with proofs, all of which have had some truth to it, and one must consider them all. Aside from leap of faith, faith and reason go hand-in-hand, Pascal’s wager argument for god, and Plantiga’s basic belief sound like good approaches to the issue of god. All of the issues proposed since St. Augustine have been taken into consideration through generations, and although Keikegaard’s leap of faith, James’ pragmatic approach and Pascal’s wager are positive approaches to this subject, the negative connotations have had some truth in them as well. Marx, Nietzsche a...