David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Religious Studies 39 (3):323-345 (2003)
In this paper, I consider V. S. Ramachandran's in-principle agnosticism concerning whether neurological studies of religious experience can be taken as support for the claim that God really does communicate with people during religious experiences. Contra Ramachandran, I argue that it is by no means obvious that agnosticism is the proper scientific attitude to adopt in relation to this claim. I go on to show how the questions of whether it is (1) a scientifically testable claim and (2) a plausible hypothesis, serve to open up some important philosophical issues concerning interpretive backgrounds that are presupposed in the assessment of scientific hypotheses. More specifically, I argue that naturalism or scientific objectivism in its various forms is not simply a neutral or default methodological backdrop for empirical inquiry but involves acceptance of a specific ontology, which functions as an implicit and unargued constitutive commitment. Hence, these neurological studies can be employed as a lever with which to disclose something of the ways in which different frameworks of interpretation, both theistic and atheistic, serve differently to structure and give meaning to empirical findings.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Michael Kober (2006). Wittgenstein and Religion. Grazer Philosophische Studien 71 (1):87-116.
Timothy Fuller (2009). Oakeshott on the Character of Religious Experience: Need There Be a Conflict Between Science and Religion? Zygon 44 (1):153-167.
Alvin Plantinga (1997). Methodological Naturalism. Origins and Design 18 (1):18-27.
J. P. Moreland (1997). Naturalism and Libertarian Agency. Philosophy and Theology 10 (2):353-383.
Alvin Plantinga (1997). Methodological Naturalism, Part 2. Origins and Design 18 (2):22-34.
Mario Alai (2012). Levin and Ghins on the “No Miracle” Argument and Naturalism. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):85-110.
David Ray Griffin (2002). Scientific Naturalism, the Mind-Body Relation, and Religious Experience. Zygon 37 (2):361-380.
Jonathan Shear (2004). Mysticism and Scientific Naturalism. Sophia 43 (1):83-99.
Jerome Arthur Stone (2008). Religious Naturalism Today: The Rebirth of a Forgotten Alternative. State University of New York Press.
Robert Arp (2000). Freud's Wretched Makeshift and Scheler's Religious Act. Journal of Philosophical Research 25:405-429.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #59,752 of 1,004,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,743 of 1,004,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?