Abstract
In this paper I develop a new recipe for solving the problem of religious disagreement suggested by the injunction to cultivate intellectual humility conjoined with awareness of human immaturity in deep time. The ingredients brought to the table include such things as noticing the full breadth and texture of the religious propositional field, observing the previously hidden areas of agreement this exposes, making a differential judgment of importance in relation to religious propositions, applying the concept of a position, and finding a better home for an emphasis on detailed beliefs than contexts of inquiry can provide. Special attention is given to the modesty of the proposal, which asks relatively little of religious practitioners while reconceiving this area of discussion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
My own view continues to develop: I am presently working on a book to be called The Humility of Reason: From Limits to Immaturities in Inquiry in which I seek to identify the proper place of inquiry’s temporal immaturity amid an array of other human immaturities.
I thank an anonymous referee for drawing to my attention the need to clarify this point more fully.
This publication was made possible through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation and Saint Louis University. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.
References
Alston, W. P. (1996). Belief, acceptance, and religious faith. In J. Jordan & D. Howard-Snyder (Eds.), Faith, freedom, and rationality. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Audi, R. (2008). Belief, faith, and acceptance. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 63, 87–102.
Cohen, L. J. (1992). An essay on belief and acceptance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hick, J. (1989). An interpretation of religion. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Howard-Snyder, D. (2013). Propositional faith: What it is and what it is not. American Philosophical Quarterly, 50, 357–372.
Roberts, R. C., & Wood, W. J. (2007). Intellectual virtues: An essay in regulative epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Samuelson, P. L., Church, I. M., Jarvinen, M., & Paulus, T. (2013). The science of intellectual humility white paper. http://trebuchet.fuller.edu/wp–content/uploads/2013/09/IH–White–Paper.pdf.
Schellenberg, J. L. (2005). Prolegomena to a philosophy of religion. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Schellenberg, J. L. (2009). The will to imagine: A justification of skeptical religion. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Whitcomb, D., Battaly, H., Baehr, J., & Howard‐Snyder, D. (2015). Intellectual humility: Owning our limitations. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. doi:10.1111/phpr.12228.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schellenberg, J.L. A modest solution to the problem of religious disagreement. Int J Philos Relig 82, 273–288 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-016-9581-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-016-9581-2