Bayle on the (Ir)rationality of Religious Belief

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


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.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 79,912

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

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.
Transcendence: Critical Realism and God.Margaret Scotford Archer - 2004 - Routledge. Edited by Andrew Collier & Douglas V. Porpora.
Understanding Hume's natural history of religion.P. J. E. Kail - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (227):190–211.
Religious ambiguity and religious diversity.Robert McKim - 2001 - New York: Oxford University Press.
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

77 (#167,638)

6 months
7 (#129,194)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kristen Irwin
Loyola University, Chicago

Citations of this work

Hume’s Answer to Bayle on the Vacuum.Jonathan Cottrell - 2019 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 101 (2):205-236.
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.
Pierre Bayle.Michael W. Hickson & Thomas M. Lennon - 2017 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Pierre Bayle.Thomas M. Lennon - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Pierre Bayle.Michael W. Hickson - forthcoming - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The philosophical writings of Descartes.René Descartes - 1984 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The history of scepticism: from Savonarola to Bayle.Richard H. Popkin - 2003 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Richard H. Popkin.
Bayle philosophe.Gianluca Mori - 1999 - Honoré Champion.
Reading Bayle.Thomas M. Lennon - 1999 - Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

View all 15 references / Add more references