Rehman 1

Talha Rehman
HIS 314
15 December 2017

Late-Renaissance Scientists and Rationality

Scientists of the 16th and 17th century Europe believed that when correctly interpreted

both religious and scientific ideas were in conformity with each other. 16th and 17th Century were

marked by religious divides following the spread of reformed religious ideas. The significance of

this period included development of critical scientific and philosophical ideas in Europe. Almost

all of the great minds behind the revolutionary scientific ideas of this time shared a theological

background. Some of the influential thinkers of this time were Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei,

René Descartes, Robert Boyle, and Blaise Pascal. All of these big names were faced by the

question of compatibility between religion and faith as they debated the ideologies of rationalism

and fideism. The ideology of rationalism is based on the idea that every principle should be

determined by reason and critical human thinking, rather than through faith. On the other hand,

the ideology of fideism is based on the idea that faith is necessary, and that beliefs which are in

conflict with human reasoning can even be accepted in matters of religion since faith is superior

and independent of reason, in religious judgements. Faith and rationality shared varying degrees

of importance in lives of these scientists as some of them were more influenced by reformed

ideas, than others. However, these scientists who were working on the frontiers of 16th and 17th

century science believed that religion was rational and most of its rationality can be established

via human reasoning. This belief directly shares its connection to the religious influences of

these scientists.

Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) believed religion can be explained through reasoning,

however his religious life has remained open to controversy. In his letter to Herwart von
 Rehman 2

Hohenburg who was a Bavarian statesman and his patron, Kepler mentioned his religious views

by stating: “I am a Christian; the Lutheran creed was taught to me by my parents…I hold fast to

it…I am earnest in Faith and I do not play with it.”1 These words indicate a strong Lutheran

inclination; yet, scholars point out his inclination towards Calvinist ideas, but Kepler in his

lifetime denied any such inclinations. It remains a fact that Kepler from a young age was

considered to be a religious rebel; he refused to believe in the Lutheran doctrine of ubiquity –

‘the omnipresence in world not only of the spirit, but of the body of Christ’2 since he found it in

contradiction with human logic. Due to this reason, he was called a heretic when he resided in

Tübingen, and later in Linz he was excluded from taking Communion.3 This highlights the fact

that Kepler considered rationality to be the defining principle in matters of religion. Thus, it can

be observed that Kepler had to face opposition due to his unshakable believe that religion was

rational and this rationality can be established via human reasoning.

Moreover, rationality of religion is a strong motivational force behind Kepler’s scientific

work as scholars consider, “God is the beginning and end of his scientific research and

striving.”4 Due to the rational foundations of religion, he believed one can be both a scientist and

a believer, for between science and religion is no real conflict.5 Wolfgang Pauli, who was a

notable physicist in his book “The Influence of Archetypal Ideas on the Scientific Theories of

1
Koestler, Arthur, and John Durston. 1960. The Watershed: a biography of Johannes Kepler.
Arthur Koestler. Foreword by John Durston. Illustrated by R. Paul Larkin. New York: Anchor
Books Doubleday and C̊. Page 81-206.
2
Kepler, Johannes, and Carola Baumgardt. 2013. Johannes Kepler: life and letters. Page 105-
172.
3
Kepler, Johannes, and Carola Baumgardt. 2013. Johannes Kepler: life and letters. Page 105-
172.
4
Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science,
philosophy, and religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 11-254.
5 Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science,

philosophy, and religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 11-254.
 Rehman 3

Kepler,” translated some of the words of Kepler: “First of all the nature of everything was bound

to represent God its creator ...”6 These words signify that Kepler believed nature is the reflection

of God’s rationality, and since only God’s rationality can ensure ‘perfect order,’ this allows for

the scientific study of nature to become possible in our world. Moreover, for Kepler this ‘order’

is a sign that God never acts at random,7 and hence strengthening his belief in God’s rationality.

Thus, it can be seen that Kepler believed that religion was rational and based on existent order of

the world he also believed that rationality of God can be proven.

Kepler’s belief that God is rational and all the actions of God follow the principles of

rationality is highlighted in his correspondence with David Fabricius who was a German pastor

involved in telescopic astronomy. Kepler stated in his letter to Fabricius: “For me nature aspires

to divinity. God is supremely rational and the human being, God’s image and likeness, cannot

but share in this rationality.”8 Kepler’s another significant belief originating from his belief

regarding God’s rationality was, that the rational God cannot allow one truth to contradict

another.9 Kepler contended from his rationality argument that science and religion being two

truths will agree when the religious scripture is interpreted correctly.10 This belief forms the

cornerstone of his scientific work related to the discovery of three laws governing planetary

motion at a time when heliocentric theory faced strong religious opposition. Thus, it can be

6
De Santillana, Giorgio. 1970. The age of adventure; the Renaissance philosophers, selected,
with introd. and interpretive commentary by Giorgio de Santillana. Page 201.
7
Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science,
philosophy, and religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 11-254.
8
Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science,
philosophy, and religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 11-254.
9
Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science,
philosophy, and religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 11-254.
10
Howell, Kenneth James. 2002. God's two books: Copernican cosmology and biblical
interpretation in early modern science. Pages 116-125.
 Rehman 4

observed that Kepler’s life was greatly influenced by his ideas regarding rationality of religion

which he used to argue the validity of his scientific works.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) subscribed to the ideology of rationalism, and also his

religious life is considered highly controversial as various critics have classified his religious

beliefs in a range of ways, some considered him to be a God-fearing Catholic while others have

claimed that he was an atheist. This variance of thoughts amongst the scholar results primarily

because there is no extensive record of his religious writings available before 1613. Unlike other

scholars of his time, Galileo kept scientific discussions almost completely separate from his

religious ideas. Galileo’s unpublished notes do contain the critic against the theologians who try

to interpret scripture contrary to natural phenomena proven by science.11 Galileo never accused

anyone of heresy due to difference of opinions, and he remained convinced that any conflict

which is thought to exist between science and religion can be solved diplomatically.12 This

highlights the fact that because he believed in the rationality of religion, he continued to possess

an optimistic outlook towards the religion-science relation at a time when religious dogma

dominated the scientific workforce.

Galileo believed that Christianity was based on rationality. He confirmed that science

share the mutual relation with religion due to its rationality. ‘Galileo once said that science is

written in the book of nature, which always lies open in front of our eyes for our inspection.’13

Galileo also admitted rationality permitted human ignorance. ‘Galileo realized that the more

11
Blackwell, Richard J., and Paolo Antonio Foscarini. 1991. Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible:
including a translation of Foscarini's Letter on the motion of the earth. Notre Dame, Ind:
University of Notre Dame Press. Pages 165-269.
12
Golino, Carlo Luigi. 1966. Galileo reappraised. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Pages 58-63.
13
Blackwell, Richard J., and Paolo Antonio Foscarini. 1991. Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible:
including a translation of Foscarini's Letter on the motion of the earth. Pages 165-269.
 Rehman 5

deeply he investigated any subject, the more one can come to realize the extent of one’s own

ignorance.’14 According to Galileo this ignorance supports the need of rational religion to explain

matters which transcend human reason.15 This argument by Galileo does not only justify a need

of a belief system, but a religion which is completely rational to explain to humans logically the

working of their world. Thus, Galileo believed that rationality of human thought, is supported by

rationality of religion in a mutual relationship to serve humans, and both Christianity and science

coexist only due to this key relationship.

On matters related to science, Galileo deeply valued human reasoning and the idea of a

rational religion. Galileo’s position was that science cannot be derived from a scripture alone, but

it can only be derived from reason. According to him reason mattered more than Scripture’s text.

Galileo was convinced that through the power of human reasoning he would be able to prove the

core of his scientific work.16 It is only due to his belief that religion is rational, Galileo argued in

his letter to Castelli, and to the Grand Duchess Christina that Bible and the natural world

originated from the same world, therefore there should be no conflict between faith and science

when the different methods pertaining to both are properly understood.17 Galileo’s commentary

in these letters was influenced by the works of St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram which

states that a truth will not contradict another truth. Therefore, ‘the truth of Holy Scripture cannot

be contrary to the true reasoning and experiences of human teaching.’18 This highlights that

14
Drake, Stillman. 1970. Galileo studies: personality, tradition, and revolution. Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan press. Pages 67-70.
15
Blackwell, Richard J., and Paolo Antonio Foscarini. 1991. Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible:
including a translation of Foscarini's Letter on the motion of the earth. Pages 165-269.
16
Sharratt, Michael. 1996. Galileo: decisive innovator. Cambridge science biographies series.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Page 119-147.
17
O'Leary, Don. 2009. "Roman Catholicism and Modern Science: A History." Page 191.
18
Sharratt, Michael. 1996. Galileo: decisive innovator. Cambridge science biographies series.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Page 119-147.
 Rehman 6

Galileo highly valued rationality with regards to its relationship with both religion and science to

identify truth. Thus, Galileo believed that religion was rational and rationality of religion is

supported by critical human thought.

René Descartes (1596–1650) was a staunch believer in the ideology of rationality

concerning matters of religion as according to him, rationality is based upon the realization "I

think therefore I am",19 which requires no faith. His religious ideas remain highly debatable

amongst the historians as he is known to be a Catholic, while claims exist that most of his ideas

share their roots from Lutheran beliefs. However, beyond these controversies his religious beliefs

are known to have their foundations from his philosophical ideas. In the preview of his book

Discourse on Method, he established “the Rule of Clarity and Distinction in the Supreme Being:

God is or exists, and is a perfect being, and that everything we have comes from him.”20 He

believed all of us exist by God’s will only. He had no sympathy with atheists.21 He argued

against atheists using his philosophical claim that ‘reason is no longer subsumed by faith and

God should be perceived individually through the faculty of reason,’22 which leaves no argument

for atheists to disbelieve. This argument also establishes that religion is nothing but logic and

rationality; therefore, this supports his primary claim that faith is not needed by a believer in the

presence of reasoning. Thus, it is basically the bridging of his religious and philosophical ideas

using the basis of rationality which makes his religious ideas more intriguing than most other

scientists of his time.

19
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 81.
20
Shea, William R. 1993. The magic of numbers and motion: the scientific career of Rene
Descartes. New York: Science History Publications. Pages 170-173.
21
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 79.
22
"Rene Descartes' Rationalizing of Religion." Socialsciences.in.
 Rehman 7

Descartes believed that science inherits its rationality from religion as well. In the third

part of his book, the Principles of Philosophy, Descartes claims that science exists because man

has been provided by the God the ability to reach valid knowledge. He deduced that human

conceptual capacity is related to the actual truths created by God.23 He acknowledged human free

will to argue that human intellect shares its Creator’s rationality.24 “In Descartes’ opinion, God

gave us minds of such a sort that we must recognize as rational…in the last resort, human reason

became the measuring-rod for the truth of existence.”25 This claim of Descartes relates that it is

finally the critical human reasoning which differentiates between the right and the wrong; and

therefore a leap of faith is no longer needed in crucial matters like that of religion. This also

highlights that Descartes saw the rationality of science and religion to be interconnected since

they share their foundations to the very same God. Thus, Descartes believed in the rationality of

religion can be confirmed by science.

Moreover, Descartes demonstrated using his philosophical ideas that the acceptance of

God and His creation have to be on rational grounds. Descartes believed that a rational attempt

made in order to apprehend the existence of God would always prove His existence.26 Descartes

mentions in one of his letter that God has determined the laws of nature and “there is not a single

one that we cannot understand if we will but consider it.” Similar views are shared by Descartes

in his philosophical treatise ‘Meditations on First Philosophy,’ in which he states that everything

“must of necessity have God for its author.”27 These words of Descartes again show his

23
Hatfield, Gary. "René Descartes." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
24
Hatfield, Gary. "René Descartes." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
25
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Pages 41-43.
26
"Rene Descartes' Rationalizing of Religion." Socialsciences.in
27 Descartes, René, and John Veitch. 1873. The Meditations and selections from the Principles of

philosophy of Descartes. Edinburgh: W. Blackwood. Pages 55-74.

 Rehman 8

inclination towards his belief in the rationality of God, and the power of human reasoning as he

considers nothing is beyond human comprehension. At the core of Descartes’ strong belief in

rationality was his idea that God does not want to deceive man28 and therefore God granted

humans the accessibility to understand Him via their intellect. Thus, Descartes believed that

religion was rational and rationality of God can be proved via human thought without any

additional consideration based on any kind of unknowns.

Robert Boyle (1627–1691) is also found to have subscribed to the ideology of rationalism

as he had “like most Englishmen…shared a naïve faith in common sense.”29 Historians find

Robert Boyle’s religious beliefs were also not completely free of controversies either. Scholars

consider him ‘a lifelong Calvinist, a Puritan at heart, and an Anglican.’30 Boyle shared Calvin's

view of accommodation that the scripture is plain enough to teach what is needed for salvation.

His works show that he had mastered both Roman Catholic and Protestant theology.31 Along

with this, he is known to have criticized atheists and deists, by stating: “…whilst they loudly cry

up reason, make no better use of it than to employ it, first to depose faith…”32 However, ‘as

Boyle recognized the limits of human reason, he also believed that man's reason could lead him

from knowledge of the physical universe to religious knowledge about God.’33 These claims

highlights the big influence of reformist ideas on Boyle as well as it shows that Boyle understood

28 Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Pages 41-43.
29
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1997. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Ancaster, Ont:
Pascal Centre for Advanced Studies in Faith and Science, Redeemer College [u.a.] Pages: 115-
123.
30
Woodall, David. "The Relationship between Science and Scripture in the Thought of Robert
Boyle."
31
Hooykaas, Reijer. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Pages 11-12.
32
Hooykaas, Reijer. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Pages 9-63.
33
Dumsday, Travis. 2008. "Robert Boyle on the Diversity of Religions." Religious Studies 44
(3): 315-332. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0034412508009529.
 Rehman 9

that human reasoning could be misused to interpret religion incorrectly as well as its correct use

could lead to God’s blessings. His published works demonstrate that he was more attracted to the

idea of using principles of reasoning to explain religion than to argue against the misuse of

human reasoning. He was even known to have used anatomy to support his religious views,34

regarding the rationality of religion. Boyle considered that religion and nature share a common

relation and he is known to believe that the rationality of religion is supported by nature as he

once stated: “…we should be ever able to give a reason why we believe.”35 This statement

relates to his belief that nature provides ample examples to believers which make it inevitable on

the grounds of rationality for them to believe in God. Thus, Boyle believed in the rationality of

religion while sharing influences from the on-going reformation movements taking place inside

Europe.

Boyle considered religion’s rationality was also supported by science. Boyle is known to

have used the biblical language of Genesis 28 to express his ideas that: “science leads to

understanding of God as study of nature leads man naturally to religion.”36 It is therefore, Boyle

defended the study of experimental science and claimed, "when properly understood, there is an

absolute harmony between the Bible and science.”37 However, Boyle maintained that the Bible

was "design'd to teach us rather Divinity than Philosophy” and is known to have criticized

Helmont, who claimed to derive science solely from the Bible.38 This actually establishes a new

premise regarding rationality – according to Boyle conjunctive approaches towards rationality

34
Hooykaas, Reijer. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Page 18.
35
Hooykaas, Reijer. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Pages 9-63.
36
Ibid. Pages 9-63.
37
Woodall, David. "The Relationship between Science and Scripture in the Thought of Robert
Boyle."
38
Woodall, David. "The Relationship between Science and Scripture in the Thought of Robert
Boyle."
 Rehman 10

share a very delicate balance which do not hold in every or any sense e.g. in this case Boyle

argues rationality of religion does not mean that science can be purely derived from it without

using critical reasoning. Thus, Boyle believed both religion and science follow the principles of

logic, however he maintained the viewpoint that rationality of religion does not mean that

everything should be derived from religion.

However, when Boyle’s beliefs are analyzed closely they represent a complex mixture of

ideas. ‘Boyle considered that it was rational to abandon reasonable theories when experience

contradict them.’39 Boyle acknowledged on the basis of his religious ideas, the weakness of

reason to explain miracles, and diplomatically argued that ‘accepting something as a miracle

presupposes God's existence based on rationality, and so miracles are to be used to institute the

correct religion rather than to ground its metaphysical basis.’40 Therefore, he considered there is

no harm in acknowledging the doctrines like that of trinity to be true without these doctrines

passing the test of rationality. He also supported this claim by stating that the right use of reason

will lead to the orthodox position; hence, he is willing to believe Bible unconditionally even if

teachings go beyond human reasoning. Scholars argue that these beliefs of Boyle follow the

philosophy of epistemological voluntarism since ‘it was his will that drove him to embrace the

faith,’ rather than rationality of religion. Nevertheless, Boyle maintained that faith can serve as

underlying rationality regarding miracles. On considering these beliefs of Boyle we can easily

observe a compromise which he readily made in favor of religion by believing that only the

primary facts behind religion have to satisfy human reasoning, while the secondary factors do

not necessarily need to meet this condition since they follow from the primary facts. Thus, it

39
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Page 47.
40
MacIntosh, J. J., and Peter Anstey. "Robert Boyle." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
 Rehman 11

would be incorrect to assume that Boyle believed that the rationality of religion can be proved

completely, and solely from human reasoning.

Blaise Pascal (1623– 1662) represents another spectrum of beliefs held by scientists of

the 16th and 17th Century as he strongly subscribed to the ideology of fideism. He was the

amongst the very few French scientists who converted to Jansenism, and this conversion is

considered to be the major development of his religious ideas. Pascal saw that miracles

mentioned in the scripture as facts41 which could not be explained via science or human

rationality. Since he was already obsessed by the idea of sin which he related to human

weakness,42 he could not look on religion as simply matter for reasoning and, therefore he argued

in favor of faith. According to him, religion appealed more to the human “heart”, than to critical

thinking; he considered that only in the depths of the heart one could find understanding of

religious matters.43 Therefore, according to him, human feelings and faith were above human

reasoning when it comes to matters of Christianity. He supported his ideas through his extensive

writing on this subject as he is considered one of the most important Christian polemics, and

almost all writings were to reflect his religious thoughts.44 His Jansenist beliefs are reflected in

his book, ‘Préface sur le traité du vide,’ in which he ‘assigned theology to the domain of

authority, alienating it entirely from the domain of reason.’45 In limelight of this argument, it can

be stated without doubt that Pascal believed that it is faith alone which can help humans

41
Bloom, Harold. 1989. Blaise Pascal. Pages 64-99.
42
O'Leary, Don. 2009. "Roman Catholicism and Modern Science: A History." Pages 244-245.
43
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Pages 99-100.
44
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 108.
45
Hubert, Marie Louise. 1952. Pascal's unfinished Apology. New Haven: Yale Univ. Pr. [usw.].
Pages 26-55.
 Rehman 12

understand religion without any assistance from reasoning. Thus, he believed that religion was

not a matter of rationality and a believer did not need critical human thinking to understand it.

Pascal argued due to limited human capabilities to reason, we cannot always consider

religion to be rational from a human perspective. According to him, reason can motivate

everyone to reach out for God, but due to the limited scope and unreliability of human

intelligence we can easily be distracted to arrive at completely wrong realizations which can lead

to atheism.46 However, he claimed someone who makes such a mistake regarding religion was

not to be blamed, but it was human reasoning to be blamed which in this situation, according to

Pascal primarily supported the evil.47 Some of Pascal’s radical beliefs are contained in his book,

Pensées in which he stated: humans alone do not have capabilities to distinguish between the

right or the wrong since human will is ‘biased with prejudice, and blinded with error.’48

Therefore he concluded that a religion along with all its contained miracles has to be completely

accepted in its complete form, and religion cannot be put into doubt or debate under the lens of

rationality.49 Coupled with this idea, he also believed, ‘God’s justice resides precisely in His

concealment of the truth; if He makes it known, it is out of His compassion, grace, and love.’50

On adding this consideration, Pascal concluded human reason and knowledge only share a weak

and unreliable authority when compared to faith, and hence faith is above reasoning in matters of

46
Pascal, Blaise, Basil Kennett, and Blaise Pascal. Thoughts on religion, and other subjects.
London: Thomas Tegg and Son, 1836. Page 164.
47
Pascal, Blaise, Basil Kennett, and Blaise Pascal. Thoughts on religion, and other subjects.
Pages 177-188.
48
Pascal, Blaise, Basil Kennett, and Blaise Pascal. Thoughts on religion, and other subjects.
London: Thomas Tegg and Son, 1836. Page 164.
49
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Pages 44-45.
50
Bloom, Harold. 1989. Blaise Pascal. Pages 30-31.
 Rehman 13

religion. Ipso facto, due to humans limited capabilities to reason, he believed that religion’s

rationality could not be correctly established via human reasoning.

Pascal’s Wager, which is Pascal’s most potent philosophical argument in favor of

“reasons of the heart” is based on probability theory51, and uses decision theory52, to argue that

during the process of making religious choice, humans are better off using faith to believe in God

rather than using rationality and choosing otherwise.53 In his book Pensées, Pascal identified

“wagering” with “believing,” and stated: ‘We discover truth, not only by reasoning, but by

feeling; and it is in this latter manner that we discover the first principles;’ and reasoning, instead

of helping in these matters, complicate these simple principles leading to confusion.54 Pascal

used this argument for faith to conclude that ‘heart’ which completely follows the lead of faith

can supplement all the necessary knowledge needed by religion, and rationality is no longer

needed. In opposition to unbelievers, Pascal explicitly stated that using faith to believe in God,

would grant one the needed success: “if you win, you win everything; if you lose, you lose

nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation, that God exists.”55 In other words, this means atheists

who may use rationality, gain nothing if they are right, while they suffer the ultimate loss if they

are wrong. Therefore, it is completely to anyone’s advantage to use faith and believe in God,

because faith promises infinite rewards, without any loss. Pascal’s argument seeks

reasonableness from the ‘heart’ i.e. faith, and not rational certainty to ensure success. Pascal used

51
Geivett, R. Douglas, and Brendan Sweetman. 1992. Contemporary perspectives on religious
epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.
52
Dawkins, Richard. 2007. The God delusion. London: Black Swan.
53
Sansom, D. (2017). Prudential versus probative arguments for religious faith: Descartes and
pascal on reason and faith. Religions, 8(8), 136.
54
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 106.
55 Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 102.
 Rehman 14

this argument to justify that religious beliefs which are of advantage to humans do not have

rationality as a prerequisite. Consequently, critics find that this argument of Pascal subscribe to

the philosophy of theological voluntarism, which maintains that ‘the will of God is supreme, and

so reason must be subservient to it.’ Pascal can be seen to predominantly believe that faith

supersedes rationality in matters of religion, however a deeper analysis of his ideas show that he

maintains that there is no essential contradiction between faith and rationality. Actually, ‘he tried

to demonstrate in his Apology that even though reason cannot produce faith, faith is a reasonable

thing and in its attainment reason may play a definite role.’56 Accordingly, faith is seen as

complementing rationality, by providing answers to questions that would otherwise be

unanswerable. In reality, Pascal held great respect for reasoning and considered it to be the

‘highest gift to man – our whole dignity consists of thinking.’57 Overall, Pascal did not totally

reject rationality’s existence when he called upon believers to “wager,” using faith, however, he

maintained faith alone is necessary for matters of religion; while indirectly agreeing that religion

is beyond rationality.

When we compare ideas of the great scientists of the 16th and 17th century we do find

differences, however, regarding their belief in rationality of religion Galileo, Kepler and

Descartes are on agreement. Galileo might had considered that Kepler’s mind was “too free” due

to Kepler’s fascination with Pythagorean harmonies;58 however, when we compare their

respective beliefs regarding religion’s rationality, we find them in agreement. ‘…Where matter

is, there is geometry’, says Kepler, and Galileo was of the same opinion.59 Hence, Galileo and

56
Hubert, Marie Louise. 1952. Pascal's unfinished Apology. Page 61.
57
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Page 46.
58
Sharratt, Michael. 1996. Galileo: decisive innovator. Page 182.
59
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Page 35.
 Rehman 15

Kepler agreed that the world itself demonstrates the rationality of God which can be understood

via critical thinking. On the other hand, Descartes who remained critical of Galileo for

deliberately avoiding metaphysical questions in his works,60 shared the views of Kepler and

Galileo in believing that the ideology of rationality can successfully interpret religion.

On further comparison between Descartes, Boyle and Pascal we find an interesting mix

of opinions regarding the interpretation of religion using the ideology of rationality. These three

personalities show a large deviation among their beliefs, consequently, it is interesting to note

they somewhat agree even in their arguments against rationalism. Descartes agreed that the

creation of the world is above human comprehension and yet his “own reasoning on the Divine

existence was all-sufficient.”61 Boyle also believed in rationality’s limitations to provide

explanation regarding miracles, and he believed the human thoughts about space and matter

could lead to preposterous explanations.62 Pascal, believed that the leap of faith was that was all

that was needed to believe correctly as he supported his idea of a ‘wager,’ instead of supporting

the ideology of rationalism. Hence, there exist a unity in a wider divide of their ideas. On

exploring this divide we find many difference of opinions as these great scientists speak their

minds about the idea of religion’s rationality. Pascal differed from Descartes as he avoided

metaphysical arguments in his proof related to God’s existence, which unlike Descartes or Boyle

he based on the ‘sentiments of the heart.’63 Unlike Descartes, Boyle also avoided philosophical

arguments and instead “frowned upon expositors who read theology or metaphysics”64 in their

60
Dutton, B. D. (1999). Physics and metaphysics in Descartes and Galileo. Journal of the
History of Philosophy, 37(1), 49-71.
61
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 79.
62
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Page 47.
63
Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc. Page 101.
64
Hooykaas, Reijer. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Pages 110-111.
 Rehman 16

works related to religion. Both Pascal and Boyle kept their science and religion strictly separate,

yet both accepted the close connection between science and religious persuasion. However,

‘Boyle’s position echoes the slogan fides quaerit intellectum: faith seeks understanding, whereas

Pascal ideas reflect the motto credo quia absurdum: I believe because it is absurd.’65 This

reflects a conflict between their opinions. Boyle considered that nature reflects the rationality of

God, and regarded rationality above human will. While Pascal emphasized that human will is

subjected to corruption and human reason is insufficient to judge matters which transcend human

thoughts.66 Futhermore, it is engaging to note that these scientists also shared relatively similar

views supporting the ideology of rationalism. Various scholars have pointed out that ‘Pascal’s

critique of rationalism was aimed at speculative reason, and not at critical reason, as he felt that

the final step in the process of reason was its acknowledgement that an infinity of things are

beyond reason.’67 Descartes, and Boyle too argued that religion was rational and most of its

rationality can be established via human reasoning. Along with this, all these scientists argued

against atheism, and on the other hand believed that science and religion were both part of the

same truth. Thus, there exists a complex relationship between the ideas related to rationality of

religion in the lives of these scientists which accounts for similarities and wide deviations in their

opinions.

To conclude, religion’s rationality can be considered as a ground reality which is

accepted by all of the five scientists discussed in this paper. There is a great degree of variance

when it comes to the acceptance of rationalism by these scientists’ due to the different influences

of reformed movements on their lives. Nonetheless, there is also an acceptance by most of these

65
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1997. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Page 127.
66
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1997. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Pages 72-126.
67
Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Page 46.
 Rehman 17

scientists regarding short-comings of human reasoning. However, it is the idea the religion is

rational and most of its rationality can be established via human reasoning that dominated the

lives of the majority of 16th and 17th century scientists.

 Rehman 18

Annotated Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Descartes, René, and John Veitch. 1873. The Meditations and selections from the Principles of

philosophy of Descartes. Edinburgh: W. Blackwood.

This book uses Descartes original works to explore his beliefs related to existence of God.

Kepler, Johannes, and Carola Baumgardt. 2013. Johannes Kepler: life and letters. New York, New

York: Philosophical Library.

This book consists of numerous primary sources related to Kepler and a section of this book

discusses religious opposition faced by Kepler.

Pascal, Blaise, Basil Kennett, and Blaise Pascal. Thoughts on religion, and other subjects. London:

Thomas Tegg and Son, 1836.

This primary source discusses Pascal's original ideas regarding incapacity of human brains to

fully understand God.

Secondary Sources:

Blackwell, Richard J., and Paolo Antonio Foscarini. 1991. Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible: including

a translation of Foscarini's Letter on the motion of the earth. Notre Dame, Ind: University of

Notre Dame Press.

This source explores Galileo’s scientific ideas with regards to his religious beliefs.

Bloom, Harold. 1989. Blaise Pascal. New York: Chelsea House Publ.

This source discusses Blaise Pascal’s religious beliefs related to religion and human capabilities.

Dawkins, Richard. 2007. The God delusion. London: Black Swan.

This source discusses briefly Pascal’s Wager in terms of decision theory.

 Rehman 19

De Santillana, Giorgio. 1970. The age of adventure; the Renaissance philosophers, selected, with introd.

and interpretive commentary by Giorgio de Santillana. Freeport, N.Y.: Books for Libraries

Press.

This book explores the comments of notable critics while discussing ideas of 16th and 17th

century philosophers and scientists.

Drake, Stillman. 1970. Galileo studies: personality, tradition, and revolution. Ann Arbor, MI:

University of Michigan press.

This source discusses Galileo’s thoughts regarding human comprehension capabilities, and

human ignorance.

Dumsday, Travis. 2008. "Robert Boyle on the Diversity of Religions." Religious Studies 44 (3): 315-

332. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0034412508009529

This source discusses the connection between Boyle’s scientific work and his faith.

Dutton, B. D. (1999). Physics and metaphysics in Descartes and Galileo. Journal of the History of

Philosophy, 37(1), 49-71. Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/docview/210613245?accountid=8578

This source discusses Galileo’s influence on Descartes.

Geivett, R. Douglas, and Brendan Sweetman. 1992. Contemporary perspectives on religious

epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.

This source explains Pascal’s Wager in terms of probability theory.

Golino, Carlo Luigi. 1966. Galileo reappraised. Berkeley: University of California Press.

This source explores Galileo’s connection to religion and philosophy.

Hatfield, Gary. "René Descartes." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. December 03, 2008. Accessed

December 06, 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes/#MarTru.

 Rehman 20

This source discusses Descartes philosophical and religious ideas.

Hooykaas, Reijer. 1974. Religion and the rise of modern science. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans

Publ.

This book mentions religious beliefs of Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, Pascal and Boyle with

regards to their ideas on the rationality of human thought.

Hooykaas, Reijer. 1997. Robert Boyle: a study in science and Christian belief. Ancaster, Ont: Pascal

Centre for Advanced Studies in Faith and Science, Redeemer College [u.a.].

This source consists of detailed exploration of Robert Boyle’s religious beliefs as well as this

source compares source compare some of Boyle’s beliefs with those of Blaise Pascal.

Howell, Kenneth James. 2002. God's two books: Copernican cosmology and biblical interpretation in

early modern science. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.

This source discusses Kepler’s religious beliefs in relation to his scientific work.

Hubert, Marie Louise. 1952. Pascal's unfinished Apology. New Haven: Yale Univ. Pr. [usw.].

This source analyses Pascal’s view that faith is above reason and provide details on his life as a

Jansenist.

Koestler, Arthur, and John Durston. 1960. The Watershed: a biography of Johannes Kepler. Arthur

Koestler. Foreword by John Durston. Illustrated by R. Paul Larkin. New York: Anchor Books

Doubleday and C̊.

A section of this book explores Kepler’s beliefs as a Lutheran.

Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's laws: the interaction of science, philosophy, and

religion. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press.

This source presents detailed outlook of Kepler’s life and beliefs in connection to his scientific

work.
 Rehman 21

MacIntosh, J. J., and Peter Anstey. "Robert Boyle." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. January 15,

2002. Accessed December 06, 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/boyle/#2.

This source discusses mentions Boyle's religious views regarding the rationality of religion. This

source particularly mentions his ideas on atheism, and miracles.

O'Leary, Don. 2009. "Roman Catholicism and Modern Science: A History." New York: The Continuum

International Publishing Group Inc, 2007.

This book discusses life of Galileo and Pascal with regards to their religious ideas.

"Philosophy of Religion." Philosophy of Religion Rene Descartes Comments. Accessed December 6,

2017. http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/whos-who/historic-figures/rene-descartes/.

This source briefly discusses and mentions some of the works of Descartes in relation to his

philosophy.

"Rene Descartes' Rationalizing of Religion." Socialsciences.in. Accessed December 6, 2017.

http://socialsciences.in/article/rene-descartes%E2%80%99-rationalizing-religion.

This source discusses Descartes idea that existence of God can be proven through rational human

thought.

Sansom, D. (2017). Prudential versus probative arguments for religious faith: Descartes and Pascal on

reason and faith. Religions, 8(8), 136. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel8080136

This source compare Descartes argument on rational human thought with ideas of Galileo and

Pascal.

Sharratt, Michael. 1996. Galileo: decisive innovator. Cambridge science biographies series. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

This source discusses Galileo’s beliefs related to the connection between science and religion,

while also his comments related to other scientists of his time.

 Rehman 22

Shea, William R. 1993. The magic of numbers and motion: the scientific career of Rene Descartes. New

York: Science History Publications.

This source discusses Descartes’ religious ideas related to rationality of human thought in the

limelight of his published books (primary sources).

Stoughton, John. 1879. Worthies of science. London: The Religious Tract Soc.

This source mention details on lives of notable scientists and compares Pascal religious ideas

with those of Descartes.

Woodall, David. "The Relationship between Science and Scripture in the Thought of Robert Boyle."

Robert Boyle. Accessed December 6, 2017. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1997/PSCF3-

97Woodall.html.

This source is about Robert Boyle's life and his religious ideas.