Slides in this set
IF WE AGREE WITH DONOVAN: RELIGION
· We have to test religious statements and see them in relation to
other religious claims, because they are not self-evidently true.
· We should not focus on only one argument / justification in
· There would be no scope for extreme atheism, as religious
experiences could not be dismissed out of hand.
· Religious experiences / encounters may have subjective meaning,
in relation to other beliefs, which fits with arguments about
religious language. Perhaps religion makes sense as a whole.
· Religions would have to be self-critical and examine their beliefs /
teachings. There is no scope for purely individualist claims being
· Donovan's arguments strengthens agnosticism, since it allows that
religious experiences are meaningful but do not provide definitive
· Religious encounters should not be used to justify harm against
others, or to make narrowly exclusivist claims they are too
IF WE AGREE WITH DONOVAN: HUMAN
· To persuade others of our experiences, it would be necessary to
have some supporting arguments or evidence.
· Our intuitions about other people may be correct, although it is
necessary to anchor them in supporting information / evidence.
· Donovan implies that we should have a balanced, critical view of
the world and our experiences. Personal intuition is not itself
knowledge, but could fit with knowledge claims. Contrast this with
more explicitly scientific approaches…read more
IF WE AGREE WITH H.P.OWEN: RELIGION
· We may reasonably claim that God exists
· It supports religious belief; it suggests that personal faith is valuable
· Extremist branches of religion could use intuition to justify faith
claims (nothing could be disproved or invalidated).
· God would no longer be seen as completely transcendent; God
would be available to all.
· If God interacts with us through personal encounter, then why
does he not intervene in our world (problem of evil, etc,)?
· Scriptural claims about direct encounter with God (e.g. Moses)
would seem to be true.
· If all faith were entirely personal / individual, how would this effect
religious conflict or cooperation? It would have profound, but
· No reason for atheism / agnosticism…read more
IF WE AGREE WITH H.P.OWEN: HUMAN
· Supports individualism / individualist thought and culture.
· Leads to a rejection of the verification principle in philosophy.
· We are justified in claiming that any of our personal, direct
experience convey `truth'.
· Lead to a conflict with science? Intuition cannot be scientifically
· Intuitive claims about ethics would also have to be accepted, along
with religion. This leads to a highly subjective ethics…read more
IF WE AGREE WITH RUSSELL: RELIGION
· Biblical claims of God's encounters with creation may be false, as
personal intuition of the divine seems discredited.
· Religions which are founded upon a personal encounter (Islam,
Christianity) would be dubious, given that we can have no certainty
about such intuitive claims to have met God.
· No highly experiential religious / sects (Pentecostalism,
Evangelicalism) and no religious mysticism
· Religion is not helpful for making judgements about life / the
· Belief in God is weakened generally; personal experience is
questioned. The argument from religious experience is weakened.…read more