Swinburne's principle of Credulity

Reductionism

Always reduce everything to a scientific reason

Why is it difficult to prove that religious experiences are experiences of God?

In order to verify if an experience is a religious experience. You use a religious experience to create a checklist to compare other experiences with, to verify they are religious experience.

There are contradictory religious experiences - they can't be true

Could all be experiencing the same thing but interpreting it in line with your world view → mystical consciousness stage 2→ seen through symbols

Richard Swinburne's principle of credulity

Might be used to support the claim that religious experiences are true and do show God exists. If something is experienced - accept it as so unless you have reason to doubt it.

Defeating conditions

If you have even one can cast doubt onto experience

If we rule these two out (i.e. They are likely and reliable) then you should trust this person's testimony

Reliability (or truth) of the claim (how likely is the claim?) AND reliability (or truth) of the testimony (how reliable is Tue testimony?)

Defeating condition: the reliability of the claim - the person making the claim has been shown to be unreliable in the past (similar to principle of credulity)

Does it apply to religious experience?: What benefit do they get from claiming this experience. Maybe if a liar had a religious experience they would stop lying

Defeating condition: the truth of the claim - the claim seems beyond the realms of possibility. Similar perceptions have been shown to be false

Does this apply to religious experience?: No, as religious experiences are beyond the realm's of possibility of humans not of an all powerful God.

Defeating condition: if there is strong evidence that the object (God) of the experience was not present / did not exist

Does this apply to religious experience?: Matter of perspective - depends on religious faith. Due to God's nature he can be present in many ways

Defeating conditions: If the experience can be accounted for in other ways

Does this apply to religious experiences?: could counteract- God created the human brain in a way that allows them to be receptive to religious experience

Swinburne's principle of testimony

Trust the claims of others unless you have reason to doubt (person isunreliable)

Swinburne's principle of credulity can support the claim that religious experiences are experiences of God

Works by comparing religious experience to ordinary sense experience

Religious experience is analogous with ordinary sense experience

They are both experienced

Religious experiences are not analogous with ordinary sense experience

Ordinary sense experience, public objects seen in the same way (e.g. a tree). All/most humans have sensory experience not everyone has religious experiences. Religious experiences are ineffable. Religious experiences always change your worldview. Ordinary sense experience can be checked or verified. Ordinary sense experience is continuous and regular, unlike religious experiences. Religious experiences can be non-sensous whereas ordinary sense can't be.