Religious Experience : verification Flashcards
(33 cards)
What are the 5 main challenges to religious experience
Science
Freud-psychology
TLE
Drugs
The God Helmet
explain how science is a challenge to Rel.Ex
-religious experience is just a product of the mind
-Human psychology not God
-can only verify brain states and this shows no evidence of God
explain how Freud is a challenge to Rel.Ex
-Rel.Ex is wish fulfilment
-God can help us control our fear of death
-Hallucinations are a result of a sub-conscious need for God
-need to have some control over our helpless state
explain how TLE is a challenge to Rel.Ex
-temporal lobe epilepsy
-people who suffer from this are prone to religious visions
-nothing more than abnormal states of the brain
-rumoured St Paul had TLE, described a lot of the symptoms
explain how The God Helmet is a challenge to Rel.Ex
-Canadian research project
-stimulate the temporal lobe
-sensory deprivation and stimulate brain patters that occur during a near death experience
-feel a presence, hear voices, see visions
explain how Drugs is a challenge to Rel.Ex
-can induce experiences that resemble religious encounters
-hallucinogenics (mushrooms, LSD)
-questions about the authenticity of these experiences
-artificially triggered experiences that are just states of the brain
what is the religious response to the challenge of Freud
-just a hypothesis that can’t be tested
-just because some wish for it doesn’t mean all are false
-a lot of Freuds other work has now been brought into question
-so many people have had these experiences, can’t all be wrong
-if you wish God might be more likely to give it to you
what is the religious response to the challenge of TLE
-Rel.Ex had to be processed by the brain anyway so what difference is it if people with TLE get more
-people with TLE could be more aware and have a more open consciousness
what is the religious response to the challenge of The God Helmet
-Rel.Ex has to be processed by the brain anyway
-people could intentionally reach out to God using the God helmet by altering there senses an consciousness
what is the religious response to the challenge of Drugs
-why shouldn’t people take f=drugs to reach out and have an experience
-connect by any means necessary
-could become a better person and gain purpose
what is James’ response to the challenge of Drugs
James’ pragmatic approach says that the transforming experience that occurs making them a better person show how the religious experience that happens even after taking drugs is genuine
What are Swinburne’s 2 principles as a response to the challenges of Rel.Ex
The Principle of Credulity
The Principle of Testimony
what is Swinburne’s principle of credulity
concludes that if it seems to someone that ‘x’ is present then ‘x’ is probably present in the absence of special conditions
what special conditions must be considered for the principle of credulity
-habitual Lier or drug user
-if someone makes unlikely claims we should be dubious
difficulty showing God was really present
-if it can be explained in other simpler ways (ockhams Razor)
what is a quote from Swinburne about the principle of credulity
“in the absence of special conditions, all religious experiences ought to be taken as genuine”
what is Swinburnes principle of testimony
-we should believe what people tell us provided there are no particular reasons not too
-if someone says they’ve had a Rel.Ex and they’re usually reliable and honest then we should believe it
what is a quote from Swinburne about the principle of testimony
“the experiences of others are as they report them”
Who challenges Swinburne’s response to the challenges
Peter Vardy
what is Vardy’s criticism of Swinburne regarding reliability
-the claim that if normal sense experience is reliable, religious experiences are reliable evidence for gods existence is very dubious
-can we move from being convinced about reliability of claims to the reliability of mystical claims about God
what is Vardy’s criticism of Swinburne regarding public and private
-ordinary sense experience is third person public
-so someone else can confirm your claims
-religious experiences are first person private
-can’t be confirmed by anyone
what is Vardy’s criticism of Swinburne regarding the amount of accounts
-even if everyone who had a Rel.Ex fully believed it was God
-it still doesn’t prove God is the right explanation of the experiences
What is the argument in favour of Swinburne regarding credulity
in terms of the principle of Credulity, if someone claims to have experienced God it will show considerable differences in their lifestyle. showing reliability
what is the argument in favour of Swinburne regarding testimony
we can observe similar changes to lifestyle so we should believe the testimony
what is Swinburne’s cumulative argument
-individual cases and evidence don’t make a convincing enough argument
-when taken together they make a cumulative case (Ockham’s razor)
-Doesn’t show God is 100% but that he is logically likely to exist
