Argument from Religious Experience

Inductive Argument
1. If something is experienced, it must exist
  1. People experience God
    1. God must exist
    2. This is not necessarily true - Subjective (the experience can't be verified)
      1. Contingent truth - If the claims of people having religious experiences are not correct, then the conclusion is not true
    3. Direct Awareness - You have experienced it therefore you know it to be true
    4. Mental Illnesses
    5. Intoxication
    6. Senses decieved
  2. An Empiricist view
    1. Based on sense experience
2. As it is an inductive argument, it can never be considered as proof but can be persuasive
Swinburne's Theory of Testimony and Credulity
1. Testimony
  1. The account of the experience
    1. Believe the person unless there is a reason not to
      1. E.g - lying would be beneficial to them, they are a known liar, they are mentally ill or they are intoxicated
  2. Can be very certain with a group experience
2. Credulity
  1. Credibility
  2. The experience itself
    1. If 'x' seems present, 'x' is probably present
      1. Unless there is reason not to believe them, again
The Cumulative Argument
1. The idea that if you put all of the arguments for the existence of God together, it creates an argument that is total proof that God exists
2. Teleological/Design Argument
  1. Cosmological Argument
    1. Ontological Argument (Existence)
      1. Moral Argument
        Religious Experience
        = Sound Argument
3. The counter for this argument is the Leaky Bucket argument
  1. The idea that all of these arguments on their own are full of holes, putting them together doesn't fix the holes, it creates more

Next up

Argument from Religious Experience

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by ebramhall almost 11 years ago