religious experiences "all in the mind"

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • religious experiences
    • not easily definable
      • otto - gods holiness 'transcends and goes beyond human and can only be measured through 'feelings' and can not be scientifically proven.
  • a subjective experience a posteriori hard to measure
    • not easily definable
      • otto - gods holiness 'transcends and goes beyond human and can only be measured through 'feelings' and can not be scientifically proven.
  • catagories
    • religious experiences
    • -interperative experience- no specific religious characteristic
      • catagories
        • revelatory- an enlightenment moment
        • mystical- the sense of apprehending reality
      • biblical experiences
        • quasi-sensory- physical sensation vision or voice
          • -interperative experience- no specific religious characteristic
            • revelatory- an enlightenment moment
            • mystical- the sense of apprehending reality
        • regenerative - conversion experience.
          • numerous - un  approachable holyness
            • healing of the paralysed man. many of biblical miracles were individual, but some like the feeding of the 5000 was corporate, corporate ones are more believable in someways because more people witnessed it, however mass hysteria could come into  play.
              • the foundation of all christian beliefs -  jesus rose and died again.
                • biblical experiences
              • demythologising the bible - rudolph boltman, bible could be more believable if it was de mythed, if one part is a myth how do we know that the rest isnt a myth.
                • the foundation of all christian beliefs -  jesus rose and died again.
                • religious experiences are valid ockhams razor, simplest explination is correct, if a religious experience is simpler to postulate than 10 coincidencesin a set order - religious experiences are most valid.
                  • Swinburne principle of testimony- we should trust those who give an account of a religious experience if there is no reason to doubt them because people generally tell the truth
                • however j. l. mackie - someone who testifies about an experience may be lying or have been miss lead. for mackie the possibility that someone has been mislead rather than the supernatural happening, religious experiences aren't valid
                  • religious experiences are valid ockhams razor, simplest explination is correct, if a religious experience is simpler to postulate than 10 coincidencesin a set order - religious experiences are most valid.
                    • Swinburne principle of testimony- we should trust those who give an account of a religious experience if there is no reason to doubt them because people generally tell the truth
                • in the mind
                  • view that they are in the mind, backed up by darren browns 2011 tv episode 'miracles for sale'
                    • mass hysteria comes into play when discussing if religious experiences are all in the mind, in darren browns 2011 episode, he trained up an average man to become a faith healer, people were 'healed' by him like with benny hinn, who is also a faith healer, but does the same tricks that darren brown taught his guy to do. this typer of healing is where  adrenaline builds up and surges through the body momentarily healing people.
                  • exposes faith healers to be fake. showing a priest that gets people to fill out prayer card before a service then gets his wife to relay the information over to him by phone to make it look like the priest had a hearing from god shows that is not a religious experience she is being miss lead.
                    • view that they are in the mind, backed up by darren browns 2011 tv episode 'miracles for sale'
                      • mass hysteria comes into play when discussing if religious experiences are all in the mind, in darren browns 2011 episode, he trained up an average man to become a faith healer, people were 'healed' by him like with benny hinn, who is also a faith healer, but does the same tricks that darren brown taught his guy to do. this typer of healing is where  adrenaline builds up and surges through the body momentarily healing people.
                  • R. M. Hare describes a religious experience as a 'bilk', which is a way of looking at the world. its in the nature of believers to see or feel something and claim that it is god.
                    • richard Dawkins 'if we are gulable and dont recognise hallucinations or lucid dreaming'
                      • experiences could have a natural explination - drugs or alcohol, because as freud suggested a physcological reaction to the world- we feel helpless so create a god who is father and protector .
                  • F. R holland a lady whos son is on the train tracks, train stopped just before, was seen as a miracle where as others would view it as a coincdence.
                    • this links to the view that religious experiences are an everyday occurrence given a religious meening is a subjective view because people with different experiences see things in different ways, one person may see the same experience as a miracle and the other may see it a a coincidence.
                      • why would god want to cause pain on the train driver just to save the boys life?
                  • judging the fruits- goes against the statement 'all in the mind'
                    • william james
                      • states that its what comes out of an experience that counts
                        • Nicky cruz - gang leader transformed by the grace of god
                          • loving nature no longer in the gang
                            • wasnt in the mind because things came out of the experience
                              • states that its what comes out of an experience that counts
                                • Nicky cruz - gang leader transformed by the grace of god
                                  • loving nature no longer in the gang
                                    • wasnt in the mind because things came out of the experience
                      • whereas if he continued to be in the gang and violent nothing good would have come out so would be question
                        • cumulative argument
                          • composed of several lines of evidence that or facts that idividually point to the conclusion
                            • one on its own is insufficient at proving the conclusion but more than one can prove substantial enough to make the conclusion seem legitimate
                        • so if more than one person states that they have had a religious experience surly they will hold up and become more reliable
                          • one on its own is insufficient at proving the conclusion but more than one can prove substantial enough to make the conclusion seem legitimate
                        • in conclusion to say that religious experiences are 'all in the mind' cannot be verified as the argument is too subjective to agree on who is write and wrong, its personal. j l mackie would say that they arnt valid as people can get their or are being mislead. however its not scientificaly measurable, to know if they have experienced somthing or not. so for this reason its not possible to speculate if a religious experience has occured or is in the mind.

                          Comments

                          No comments have yet been made

                          Similar Religious Studies resources:

                          See all Religious Studies resources »See all Philosophy resources »