This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
William James,The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1902), Modern Library Reprint, pp. 67–68.
Rodney Stark and Charles Y. Glock,American Piety: The Nature of Religious Commitment (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968).
p. 130.
I discuss this objection less fully than here in “Religious Experience and Religious belief,” inFaith and Rationality, ed. A. Plantinga and N. Wolterstorff (University of Notre Dame Press, 1983); “Perceiving God,”Journal of Philosophy 83. 11 (November 1986).
For a fairly full treatment see my “A “Doxastic Practice” Approach to Epistemology,” inEpistemology: The State of the Arts, ed. Marjorie Clay and Keith Lehrer (Westview Press, 1990).
This paradigm could be viewed as a purified Wittgensteinianism, purified of such elements as those just mentioned. But it is no doubt closer in spirit to the epistemology of Thomas Reid. See my essay, “Thomas Reid on Epistemic Principles,”History of Philosophy Quarterly (1985).
For some recent thoughts on this problem see my “Religious Diversity and Perceptual Knowledge of God,”Faith and Philosophy 5. 4 (October 1988).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Alston, W.P. The autonomy of religious experience. Int J Philos Relig 31, 67–87 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01307985
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01307985