Thought Experimenting with God. Revisiting the Ontological Argument

Starting from Fehige’s and Polkinghorne’s analyses of the analogies between theological and scientific thought experiments (TEs), the main aim of this paper is to clarify the distinctive character of theological TEs. For this purpose, we shall compare theological TEs with empirical and, although only in passing, with narrative TEs. In order to facilitate the comparison between scientific and theological TEs, the first part of the paper provides a brief outline of an account regarding TEs in the empirical sciences from the viewpoint of a functional, not material, a priori, which is in line with, if not the full letter, the spirit of Kant’s a priori. On the basis of this view, we shall investigate the most important difference (which is the source of many others) between theological and empirical TEs. In spite of the many similarities, the most important difference between empirical and theological TEs lies in the fact that theological TEs consider both empirical-descriptive and moral-normative contents from the point of view of a search for an absolute meaning beyond all relative and finite meanings. If we—developing a suggestion by Ernst Troeltsch—interpret this claim from the point of view of a purely functional “religious a priori”, we may conclude that theological TEs, which express a search for an absolute meaning, do not possess a priori contents, not even moral.

Section: Unity and Distinction Of Theological Empirical And Narratimentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thought Experiments between Theology, Empirical Science, and Fictional Narrative

Savojardo

2019

“…However, as we shall see in this second part of the paper, it is possible, bearing in mind the indirect link between thought and action in the face of theological questions, to recognize the cognitive value of the theological thought experiment, especially if we consider the narrative function of the thought experiment and the relationship of unity, on the one hand, and distinction, on the other, between theological and literary thought experiments (cf. Fehige 2009aFehige , 2009bFehige , 2011Fehige , 2012Fehige , 2019Fehige and Stuart 2014;Stuart et al 2018). The art of narration can be understood as a means by which, in theology, as in fiction, the ability to imagine possible scenarios succeeds in exerting an indirect or reflexive influence on our lived experience.…”

Section: The Role Of the Thought Experiments In A Revealed Theologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The thought experiment, in fact, would seem to fulfil a similar function in both the theological and narrative spheres. If we understand thought experiments as "facilitators of intuition" (Fehige 2009a), we can think of an intuitive process that, in a counterfactual manner and through narration, modifies the way we reason and relate to the real world. The narrative element thus assumes a central role, both in fiction and in theology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thought Experiment between Revealed Theology and Narrative

Savojardo

2022

The paper addresses the problem of the epistemic value of thought experiment, in revealed theology, insofar as it possesses a fundamental trait in common with fiction. Starting from Fehige’s proposal to reread St. Anselm’s ontological argument as a thought experiment of revealed theology and in the light of important differences between the use of scientific and theological thought experiments, it is possible, even in theology, to speak of an indirect or ‘reflexive’ nexus between thought and action. On the basis of this nexus, one can rethink the epistemic role of the theological thought experiment in relation to the art of narration that brings theological thought experiments and fiction closer together. However, it is always the context in which the thought experiment is considered that determines its value and role.

“…In the scope of this article, I will also take into account the theological kind of thought experimenting that, in recent years, has been discussed by Fehige (2009Fehige ( , 2012Fehige ( , 2014 in particular. While there are many thought experiments that address religious themes within the constraints of a philosophical framework, it is less common to refer to their theological counterparts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Thought Experimenting Qualities of Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling

Lindberg

2019

In this article, I examine the possible thought experimenting qualities of Søren Kierkegaard’s novel Fear and Trembling and in which way (if any) it can be explanatory. Kierkegaard’s preference for pseudonyms, indirect communication, Socratic interrogation, and performativity are identified as features that provide the narrative with its thought experimenting quality. It is also proposed that this literary fiction functions as a Socratic–theological thought experiment due to its influences from both philosophy and theology. In addition, I suggest three functional levels of the fictional narrative that, in different ways, influence its possible explanatory force. As a theoretical background for the investigation, two accounts of literary cognitivism are explored: Noël Carroll’s Argument Account and Catherine Elgin’s Exemplification Account. In relation to Carroll’s proposal, I conclude that Fear and Trembling develops a philosophical argumentation that is dependent on the reader’s own existential contribution. In relation to Elgin’s thought, the relation between truth and explanatory force is acknowledged. At the end of the article, I argue that it is more accurate to see the explanatory force of Fear and Trembling in relation to its exploratory function.