3 ms·
I’ve always thought it was because living a life with meaning requires faith in one way or another, and the Christian existentialists were simply more comfortab
by AmericanChopper 6y ago
I’ve always thought it was because living a life with meaning requires faith in one way or another, and the Christian existentialists were simply more comfortable with the concept. The involvement of Christian theology really just muddies the waters imo, because the broader topic is really just about faith, and any effort to impart your own meaning (whether religious or otherwise) to your own life is naturally an act of faith. Kierkegaard was a Christian, but his philosophy revolves primarily around the concept of faith (believing something you can’t prove). Nietzsche was an atheist, but his Death of God was a rejection of faith in general as the basis for providing any meaning to life.
The leap of faith as a philosophical concept is not about religion. It’s the concept that a person can provide their own life with meaning, without any rational proof to support such a conclusion. If you find the work of Christian existentialists to be superior, it’s likely because you find the leap of faith to be the superior response to the absurd.