religious experience

30 MARKS - RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE

intro

doesn’t seek to prove the existence of God, just makes it more likely that He exists

we know things exist because we experience them: therefore if we experience God he must exist

James + Otto developed criteria for religious experiences (such as…)

transiency passivity + mysterium

religious experiences can be hard to define and their private nature makes them very subjective

experiences include personal revelations, mystical states, visions, or miracles

they are considered by some as the most profound form of evidence for God’s existence Philosophers and theologians have developed arguments such as the argument from religious experience

interpretations can be influenced by cultural preconceptions or faith

These claims face significant challenges, including psychological, sociological, and philosophical critiques

p1

james criteria : passivity, ineffability, noetic quality and transiency

transiency is one of the criteria

idea that the event has a long-lasting impact

e.g conversion of saul to paul

must conclude an “objective cause” is the reason for such

Copleston : religious experience must have a good impact

Russel : “the fact that an experience has a good effect on a man is not whatsoever favour of its truth”

e.g japanese cartoon character that drove people to suicide

^ regarded as “loving a phantom”

visceral reaction and impact, but can you universalise the idea that the objective cause must be God ?

james was a pragmatist, caring more about the effect than the experience itself

CORPORATE EXPERIENCES

happen to many people e.g Pentecost

makes it more reliable

could just be mass hysteria

avoids physiological critique

SYNOPTIC LINK : UTILITARIANISM

pragmatic : care about the consequence

utilitariansim : the more people are happy , the more correct the action must be

the more people positively affected the more likely it is that it’s truly occurred

swinburne supports this with the principle of credulity

we dont question everyday experiences (they’re reliable ) so why should we question religious experiences

“we ought to believe that things are as they seem to be until we have evidence that we are mistaken”

also presents the idea of a 6th sense, a sense of the religious.

if we trust our 5 senses, we must trust the 6th too

he adds on the principle of testimony

normally people don’t lie

so in “the absence of special considerations” we would believe a person

(acknowledging when not to believe someone is a strength)

countered with the idea of negative credulity

lack of experience means something doesn’t exist

an atheist has not experienced god so would conclude he doesn’t exist

HOWEVER (criticisms)

people lie

the 6th sense is unscientific '

you cant compare religious experiences to everyday experiences because they’re something extraordinary

DESCARTES

doesn’t believe you can trust your senses and gives the example of optical illusion

also why trust people when they can lie

“the senses deceive from time to time and it is prudent to never trust wholly those who have deceived us even once”

NATURALISTIC EXPLANATIONS

psychological or physiological

this removes the need of a higher power because it can be explained away by science

russell supports this saying “ there is no distinction between the man who eats little and sees heaven and the man who drinks much and sees snakes”

the idea of eating little links to fasting which is present in many religions such as Buddhism or Christianity, where many members have claimed to have some religious experience of sorts

main idea is temporal lobe epilepsy which can cause seizures due to a disconnection between the temporal love

this could explain away st pauls experience as he was thought to have tle (LANDSBOROUGH)

“it is because of my illness I first preached the gospel to you”

similarly ellen white who was struck in the face by a stone at the age of 9 had her first religious experience a 12 where her eylids fluttered rabidly, she ouldnt’t breathe well and was temporarily wek and couldn’t see - which could be signs of a seizure

to prove this Persinger devised an experiment

the god helmet

it produced magnetic fields to disrupt communication between temporal lobes and participants in the experiment claimed to have had either an experience with god or the feeling of another presence

(note : goes against the passivity criteria of religious experience)

HOWEVER when Granqvist repeated this as a double-blind study no one experience anything

other explanations include schizophrenia,

freud blames mere hallucinations

conclusion :

religious experiences are personal and private, limiting their significance to the person who experienced it and the way they interact with other people

too subjective to prove God, and even to increase the probability significantly

SYNOPTIC LINK

principle of testimony to new testament 6.1

early christian believers converting to christianity due to eyewitness testimony