-9-
THE ARGUMENT FROM RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE
• This argument holds that one might be directly (experientially) aware of God’s existence.
• Given that, according to theism, God is immaterial being who is beyond time and space, how can He be be subject to direct human experience?
The Cognitive Value Religious Experience
For an experience to be cognitive some conditions are needed.
Likewise we might rightly expect religious experience to meet certain conditions to be veridical.
• The experience should not be illusory; the subject must be epistemically reliable.
• The object of experience (God) should be distinct (independent) from experience.
Religious Experience
• Those who oppose religious experience usually argue that, unlike ordinary sense experience, it is not
possible to test the veridicality of such an experience.
• It is difficult to determine the difference between
“really experiencing God” and “as if experiencing
God”. Whereas, there is no such difficulty in the case of sense perception.
Religious Experience as a Perception
• There is a difference between sensory experience and religious experience.
• This is somehow natural, because religious experience is about an immaterial being such as God.
• But, is perceptual experience restricted to sensory experience only?
Cannot there a non-sensory perception?
• Considering that limiting perception to sense-perception is arbitrary and unjustified, W. P. Alston argued that God can be perceived in a non-sensory way. Such a perception takes place when God presents Himself to someone’s awarenes through His Properties («The Theory of Appearance»).
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SENSORY AND RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE
• It seems that the scope of sense experience is broader as it can be shared by others, whereas the religious experience seems to remain as somewhat private.
• Since, in religious experience, the object (God) is a voluntary being, such an experience is also depends on the will of God.
• However, these dissimilarities do not seem to be sufficient for thinking that religious experience is non-veridical. It can only show that religious experience cannot be put in the boat with ordinary sensory experience.
PRINCIPLE OF CRUDELITY
• According to this principle, (which is used by R.
Swinburne) if it seems to someone that he is
experiencing something –in the absence of a reason for thinking otherwise- his claim is probably true.
• Some others argue that having a positive effect on the subject may indicate that such a religious experience is veridical.
• How are to determine such a positive effect?
EVALUATION
• It can be argued that the principle of credulity alone is not enough to prove the existence of God through religious experience.
• Some additional (indirect) evidence for the existence of God seems to be needed.
• Consequently, although it is hard to disprove religious experience, we need some criteria. Again, theologically speaking, if God is beyond time and space, it difficult to see how He can be directly experienced, even though He can present Himself to awareness of human beings through His attributes / actions. The claims of religious experience should
therefore be considered in the context of our priori intuitions about God.
