Abstract
THESIS: Philosophical analysis provides fideism with a crucial problem. It seems that we can accept on faith only what we can understand. For if we cannot understand something, we cannot know what it is we are to accept on faith. Yet crucial religious assertions appear to be completely without truth value. But if they are, how then can we possibly accept them on faith? This essay examines some efforts to get around this barrier to an appeal to faith and concludes that fideism can only be a satisfactory apologetic stance if the factual intelligibility of key religious utterances has been established.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.