The More Theology, The Better Philosophy: Emmanuel Falque’s Phenomenological Method

Abstract

This article examines Emmanuel Falque’s phenomenological approach to the relationship between theology and philosophy. Falque challenges the idea that these two disciplines should be sharply separated, arguing instead that they can transform one another through mutual interaction. Using the metaphor of “crossing the Rubicon,” he suggests that the philosopher can step into the theological realm, just as the theologian can deepen their thought through philosophical reflection. In this context, phenomenological issues such as human finitude, embodied existence, and the experience of transcendence are identified as the common ground for dialogue between theology and philosophy. Falque’s principle of proportionality— “the more we theologize, the better we philosophize” —encapsulates this approach, suggesting that theological thought can deepen philosophical inquiry. However, for this integration to be meaningful, both disciplines must preserve their methodological integrity. The fundamental difference between philosophy and theology stems not from the subjects they address but from their methodological approaches and epistemological starting points. Since philosophy seeks knowledge through human experience and reason, it typically moves from below, building its framework through inquiry and analysis. In contrast, theology, taking revelation or divine truths as its foundation, proceeds from above, shaping its intellectual structure based on predetermined truths. Moreover, while philosophical inquiry advances through questioning and discovery, theological thought is primarily concerned with explaining specific dogmatic doctrines. However, according to Falque, these differences do not mean that philosophy and theology are entirely independent of one another. There is a common ground between the two fields, which is established through the existential experience of the human being. Falque argues that at the core of both theological and philosophical belief systems lies a shared trust in the world and existence. This perspective makes it possible to overcome the sense of alienation between different belief systems and to create a deeper space for encounter and dialogue. According to Falque, philosophy contributes to theology by offering an approach that seeks to uncover the internal dynamics of theological problems rather than treating them as fixed truths. It differs from didactic approaches that assume theology already possesses the answers and merely needs to instruct the reader. Meanwhile, philosophical thought expands theology’s understanding of the human being, allowing human existence to be examined within a fully human framework. By engaging with humanity as it is, theology can align with philosophical explanations of the experience of finitude and then explore how this experience might be transformed by theology or revelation. In other words, theology can affirm the significance of human experience only by starting from its ordinary aspects and, ultimately, reshape the meaning of human finitude. Falque does not only examine how philosophy contributes to theology but also explores how theology can open new horizons for phenomenology. In his view, phenomenology is not merely a secular philosophical method but a field of thought that is also enriched by the concepts and meaning structures offered by theology. Building on Husserl’s notion of intuition as a fundamental principle of phenomenology, Falque argues that theological phenomena can be described not only within a religious context but also within a philosophical framework. However, the key point here is that the philosopher approaches what is “real” for the theologian merely as a “possibility.” This ensures that philosophical thought is not reduced to theological dogma while allowing both fields to maintain their distinct methodologies. Falque’s views have been criticized, particularly by thinkers who advocate for the independence of philosophy. Philosophers such as O’Leary have interpreted Falque’s principle— “the more we theologize, the better we philosophize” — as a form of theological imperialism. According to this critique, philosophy should remain an independent discipline, free from the influence of religious beliefs. It is argued that while theology is a faith-based system of knowledge, philosophy is grounded in rational inquiry, and therefore, philosophy’s engagement with theology should be limited. Falque, however, rejects this criticism, asserting that philosophers can engage with theological questions as long as they do so while maintaining philosophy’s methodological rigor. Philosophy is not required to accept religious concepts at face value, but it does have the right to question their meaning and possibilities. In conclusion, Falque’s phenomenological approach challenges the notion that philosophy and theology are entirely separate disciplines, suggesting instead that they can undergo mutual transformation. His thesis aims to demonstrate how phenomenology can contribute to theology and how theology, in turn, can offer new perspectives to phenomenology. In this context, he presents a model of interdisciplinary encounter that enhances the productivity of thought and expands the boundaries of both fields. Falque’s principle of proportionality—“the more we theologize, the better we philosophize”—encapsulates this approach, suggesting that theological thought can deepen philosophical inquiry. However, for this integration to be meaningful, both disciplines must preserve their methodological integrity. The fundamental difference between philosophy and theology stems not from the subjects they address but from their methodological approaches and epistemological starting points. Since philosophy seeks knowledge through human experience and reason, it typically moves from below, building its framework through inquiry and analysis. In contrast, theology, taking revelation or divine truths as its foundation, proceeds from above, shaping its intellectual structure based on predetermined truths. Moreover, while philosophical inquiry advances through questioning and discovery, theological thought is primarily concerned with explaining specific dogmatic doctrines. However, according to Falque, these differences do not mean that philosophy and theology are entirely independent of one another. There is a common ground between the two fields, which is established through the existential experience of the human being. Falque argues that at the core of both theological and philosophical belief systems lies a shared trust in the world and existence. This perspective makes it possible to overcome the sense of alienation between different belief systems and to create a deeper space for encounter and dialogue. According to Falque, philosophy contributes to theology by offering an approach that seeks to uncover the internal dynamics of theological problems rather than treating them as fixed truths. It differs from didactic approaches that assume theology already possesses the answers and merely needs to instruct the reader. Meanwhile, philosophical thought expands theology’s understanding of the human being, allowing human existence to be examined within a fully human framework. By engaging with humanity as it is, theology can align with philosophical explanations of the experience of finitude and then explore how this experience might be transformed by theology or revelation. In other words, theology can affirm the significance of human experience only by starting from its ordinary aspects and, ultimately, reshape the meaning of human finitude. Falque does not only examine how philosophy contributes to theology but also explores how theology can open new horizons for phenomenology. In his view, phenomenology is not merely a secular philosophical method but a field of thought that is also enriched by the concepts and meaning structures offered by theology. Building on Husserl’s notion of intuition as a fundamental principle of phenomenology, Falque argues that theological phenomena can be described not only within a religious context but also within a philosophical framework. However, the key point here is that the philosopher approaches what is “real” for the theologian merely as a “possibility.” This ensures that philosophical thought is not reduced to theological dogma while allowing both fields to maintain their distinct methodologies. Falque’s views have been criticized, particularly by thinkers who advocate for the independence of philosophy. Philosophers such as O’Leary have interpreted Falque’s principle—“the more we theologize, the better we philosophize”— as a form of theological imperialism. According to this critique, philosophy should remain an independent discipline, free from the influence of religious beliefs. It is argued that while theology is a faith-based system of knowledge, philosophy is grounded in rational inquiry, and therefore, philosophy’s engagement with theology should be limited. Falque, however, rejects this criticism, asserting that philosophers can engage with theological questions as long as they do so while maintaining philosophy’s methodological rigor. Philosophy is not required to accept religious concepts at face value, but it does have the right to question their meaning and possibilities. In conclusion, Falque’s phenomenological approach challenges the notion that philosophy and theology are entirely separate disciplines, suggesting instead that they can undergo mutual transformation. His thesis aims to demonstrate how phenomenology can contribute to theology and how theology, in turn, can offer new perspectives to phenomenology. In this context, he presents a model of interdisciplinary encounter that enhances the productivity of thought and expands the boundaries of both fields.