Religious Experience A Summary – so far...

Religious Experience and the argument A religious experience may be understood as any encounter with God, or what is ultimate. It is an experience of transcendent reality, seen in many different ways in different faith traditions. There are actually a number of different types of argument. For instance, some argue from ‘direct awareness’ – the view that God can be known intuitively (directly) by the person perceiving him. This is very personal however, and has limited capacity to persuade others. Most commonly, theistic philosophers have preferred to talk about an argument from religious experience: an inductive and a posteriori argument based on the evidence of witnesses and testimonies.

A summary of the inductive argument If an entity is experienced, it must exist God is the sort of being that it is possible to experience People claim to have experienced God directly Conclusion: God exists God also uses PowerPoint to help revise.

Developing the argument: Richard Swinburne A key supporter of the inductive argument from religious experience is the philosopher Richard Swinburne. He offers the following arguments: In his book (Is There a God?) Swinburne claims that it is reasonable to suppose that God would seek to engage and interact with his creation. This would fit with the nature and attributes of God: he is omnipotent and benevolent. If God exists, we should expect religious experiences to take place. Swinburne defends the idea that those experiencing God should believe intuitively what their senses tell them. He calls this the Principle of Credulity. He also argues that we should trust those who give accounts of religious experiences, if there is no reason to doubt them. He calls this the Principle of Testimony. Swinburne readily admits that known liars, those influenced by drugs, etc. should not be trusted.

Essentially, Swinburne is trying to leave the burden of proof with those who doubt religious experiences. If we experience something, we tend to assume that this experience is genuine. Why should it not be the same with religious experiences? If such experiences are genuine, it is reasonable to conclude that God or some higher power probably exists. This line of argument is similar to the one developed by William Alston in Perceiving God – he claims that all beliefs based on perception are prima facie justified: “they are innocent until proven guilty”.

Other forms of argument A few other types of argument based on religious experience might also be considered, although they are less favoured by modern philosophers. The ‘historical argument’ states that the experiences of key individuals have been so great and impressive that they must be true: Mohammed, St. Paul, etc. Such individuals had enormous influence after receiving religious experiences. The ‘cumulative argument’ states that so many people have had religious experiences in the past that they simply cannot all be making it up. God must be the cause of (at least some of) this. St. Paul – vision of Christ knocked him off his horse The trouble with these arguments is that they’re very subjective and ambiguous. Who’s to say whether Mohammed has had a ‘great’ impact or not? Also, it’s implausible that God would be evident in all of these differing experiences, since so many are so different. Surely they rule each other out.

The Varieties of Religious Experience William James, author of The Varieties of Religious Experience A significant aspect of religious experience is the considerable variety of types: conversions (like that of St. Paul), corporate experiences, near death experiences, or mystical encounters. The philosopher and psychologist William James was impressed by this great variety. He thought that the heart of religion lay in personal experiences which for the individual would be “absolutely authoritative”. James sees experiences as personally persuasive, rather than as evidence to prove God to others inductively. James regarded mysticism as a significant state of mind or awareness, identifying four key features of such important experiences: (1) Ineffability – they cannot be explained (2) Noetic Quality – they impart knowledge, (3) Transiency – they are over quickly, (4) Passivity – they come upon the individual without being sought after. Key mystic: Teresa of Avila

Weaknesses of the argument The problem with an inductive argument is that it only ever gives probable explanations for states of affairs. This can lead to questionable ‘leaps’ in the evidence. Claims to experience God can never amount to proof as there are many alternative explanations: states of mind can be chemically or drug induced, or they might be part of a natural and sub-conscious healing process (so Viktor Frankl), or they might result from activity in the temporal lobes. Psychological Critiques A number of psychologists have also made criticisms of the argument from religious experience. According to Freud religion is wishful thinking – human minds create the illusion to combat psychological turmoil. The human mind creates images & beliefs to fulfil basic needs and desires. Freud described religion as an illusion – not necessarily false, but something that answer inner needs. Religion centres on its sole function as a means of overcoming inner fears and turmoil that spring from the subconscious mind. The ritualistic nature of religious activity is a compulsive obsessive neurosis and arises from the fear of a chaotic and un-ordered world. An illusion to escape reality. Pioneer of research in to the unconscious mind – religion is a form of neurotic illness

Jung was more positive about the role of religion Sigmund Freud Freud argued that religion is a way of dealing with the inner guilt that is experienced as a result of the Oedipus Complex (with it’s feelings of sexual repression). Feelings of powerlessness are dealt with through the projection of a father figure and ritualistic practices of religion. Freud & Jung worked together until they disagreed over sexuality causing psych. problems Carl Gustav Jung Jung noted similarities between the imagery used by various of his patients. He concluded there was a division between parts of the unconscious mind: the personal and the collective unconscious - the unconscious involves the sharing od a series of images (archetypes) Religion provides many of these images. Jung was more positive about the role of religion

God is an archetype. Each of us is born with a tendency to generate religious images. We share these archetypes through collective unconscious. Individuals participate in their cultural heritage through these archetypes. Jung argued that it is impossible to prove the existence (or the non-existence) of God – all that can be asserted is that God exists in the psychic reality. He believes religion is a safety feature, acting as a balance between different archetypes and thereby preventing neurosis. To prove or not to prove

Possible responses to criticisms Religion is no more an illusion than science – both involve interpretation of data & subsequent imposition of the world Freud’s argument that religion arises out of worship of a father figure neglects religions in which the deity is a woman or the system has no deity at all Freud’s theory could only work if guilt was passed down from generation to generation – guilt cannot be passed on therefore Freud’s idea that religion arises out of repressed guilt is bogus Religion has done much that is positive; it has offered people real consolation in difficult times. It has provided certainty & order in otherwise anarchic society Contrary to Scooby Doo, there isn’t always a ‘perfectly straightforward explanation’.

In Summary.... If God does not exist – there can be no experience of him Any R.E. Maybe open to non-religious interpretation Experiences can be deceptive and there are no agreed tests for verifying that an experience comes from God The testimony of religious believers is unreliable, as their views may be affected by their pre-existing religious beliefs R.E. May be a manifestation of psychological needs, for instance to help us cope with fear of death The emotions and sensations that come out of R.E. Can be explained by biological or neurological imbalances in the body

The Three Fold & The Four Fold Tests of R.E. Final Steps