Philosophy Compass 8 (6):560-569 (2013)

Kristen Irwin
Loyola University, Chicago
Bayle's conception of reason is notoriously difficult to unravel, as are its consequences for the rationality of religious belief. The secondary literature has generally coalesced around two interpretations of Bayle's conception of reason. The “superskeptical” interpretation holds that reason is the source of its own undoing, not to be trusted; religious belief turns out to be irrational on this conception of reason, but this is hardly cause for alarm. The jusqu'au bout (to the very end) interpretation holds that reason is to be followed wherever it leads, and if one follows closely, reason requires the rejection of religious belief. On both models, religious belief turns out to be irrational. In this piece, I summarize and examine these two interpretations, and using José Maia Neto's exposition of Bayle as an Academic skeptic, I propose a third that I call “common sense” skepticism. On this reading, reason does indeed use logic to form and sort beliefs – including some religious beliefs – but only holds to those beliefs fallibilistically. There may be a category of religious beliefs, however, that can only be recommended by faith; these would be religious beliefs that lack rational evidence, or exhibit rational contradictions. On this view, while some religious beliefs may turn out to be rational, there will likely be a set of core religious beliefs that come out to be irrational. I end by highlighting a suggestion by Bayle that reason itself may recommend revelation as a guide to belief, conferring a kind of intermediate rationality even on apparently irrational religious beliefs.
Keywords Pierre Bayle  religious belief  rationality  skepticism  moral belief  faith
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/phc3.12044
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,307
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Bayle Philosophe.Gianluca Mori - 1999 - Honoré Champion.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Pierre Bayle: Dialogues of Maximus and Themistius.Pierre Bayle & Michael W. Hickson - 2016 - Leiden, Netherlands: Brill's Texts and Sources in Intellectual History 256/18.
Hume’s Answer to Bayle on the Vacuum.Jonathan Cottrell - 2019 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 101 (2):205-236.
Opposing Bonsais.Mario Wenning - 2021 - Kritike 15 (3):i-i.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Amyraut on Reason and Religious Belief.Kristen Irwin - 2011 - Modern Schoolman 88 (3-4):191-200.
Swinburne and Plantinga on Internal Rationality.Alvin Plantinga - 2001 - Religious Studies 37 (3):357-358.
Understanding Hume's Natural History of Religion.P. J. E. Kail - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (227):190–211.
Religious Beliefs and Aspect Seeing.N. K. Verbin - 2000 - Religious Studies 36 (1):1-23.
Reasons and Religious Belief.Patrick Lee - 1989 - Faith and Philosophy 6 (1):19-34.


Added to PP index

Total views
68 ( #168,959 of 2,507,870 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #276,895 of 2,507,870 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes