Wszołek, Stanisław2024-03-122024-03-121993Tarnowskie Studia Teologiczne, 1993, T. 12, s. 29-39.0239-4472http://theo-logos.pl/xmlui/handle/123456789/14132Pascal’s sharp distinction between „God of philosophers” and „God of Abraham” raises the question of whether God can be the subject of philosophical analysis. In the paper this question is discussed basing on Pascal’s writings. It is argued that, despite many critical remarks about rational proofs for the existence of God, his way of approaching this problem was by no means irrational. The idea of reading some Pascal’s statements that way tends to overestimate the influence of Poit-Royal circles and underestimate the change of the world-picture which in his time began to be strongly felt. Pascal’s own proofs for the existence of God show their own rationality. One of the conditions of rationality is that we be able to discuss our views in terms which everyone, at least in principle, can understand. From this point of view the radical distinction between „God of philosophers” and „God of faith” is the least desired thing.plAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Polandhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl/Bógfilozofiarozumowe poznanie BogawiararozumTomasz z AkwinuKartezjuszBlaise PascalRené Descartesistnienie Bogazakład PascalaBóg filozofówteodyceapoznaniepoznanie Bogapoznanie rozumowedoktorzy KościołafilozofowieGodphilosophyrational cognition of GodfaithmindThomas Aquinasexistence of GodPascal's WagerGod of philosopherstheodicycognitioncognition of Godrational cognitionDoctors of the ChurchphilosophersArticle