The belief in the truth or falsehood of an aspect is as a result of one’s passional life (James, 2010, P. 153).The thought of God’s existence, hence, even without evidence stands in a gray area because those who believe in it have had several aspects of their life that relate to his existence and hence, will always come up with evidence that can be considered insufficient but to them, they are sufficient. On the other hand, those who seek the error in such a belief will find a fault. There is freedom to believe in what one will (James, 2010, P. 153). The definition of faith is the belief of things not seen. It is a strong conviction, regardless of the fact that one has not seen what they believe in. Hence they do not have a tangible proof. Hence, it is possible that there are things that people believe in without sufficient evidence. Due to the freedom stated above, I am personally okay with people believing what they would like to. Besides, even aspects that have scientific proof that they are the truth, such are as a result of a hypothesis that someone tried to prove according to what they believe is right. This might not be agreeable to all, and that is the reason several scientific theories have critics of all types. Based on the fact that proving the reality of something is as a result of one’s conviction, it is only fair to be okay with people believing in what they think is right. Regardless, depending on who holds the belief of God existence, it is okay to believe that he exists without substantial prove since it is a matter of reason and faith where faith takes an upper hand in the argument. (James, 2010, P. 140). On carrying out a cost-benefit analysis, by believing that God exists in faith, one is likely to benefit more in such thoughts in comparison to not believing that he does. Pascal believes that faith has infinite benefits. The loss related to not believing in God equally has infinite losses. He then prefers faith where there it is possible to benefit immensely (James, 2010, P. 141).According to this philosopher, hence, it is right to believe in God even without sufficient evidence that he exists. This is a plausible and agreeable thought since the matter is highly abstract and it is hence better to choose a side that will probably benefit one.
References
James, W. (2010). The will to believe. Reading philosophy of religion , 139-183.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
