Religious Experience and Scientific Method [Book Review]
Review of Metaphysics 26 (1):178-179 (1972)
AbstractIn this, his first book, originally published in 1926, Henry Nelson Wieman sets forth a view on the relationship of religious experience and scientific method which in substance he has maintained ever since. According to Wieman, our knowledge of the concrete world consists of immediate sensuous experience as interpreted through some set of concepts. Religious experience is the richest form of immediate sensuous experience. It is our awareness of God, who is as much an object of experience as are tree and hill and stone. And scientific method is the systematic procedure by which the conceptual network for interpreting immediate sensuous experience is clarified and corrected, with the experience-concept compound thus becoming "science." Religious experience, therefore, receives its most adequate interpretation in science; while science, in turn, receives its most stimulating input from religious experience. In principle, the highest of the individual sciences is theology; in fact, however, the very complexity of religious experience and the difficulty of distinguishing it clearly from other types of immediate sensuous experience have prevented more than merely minimal progress in achieving a truly scientific theology. On the whole our ideas about God are marked by confusion and controversy, therefore, despite the fact that some of these notions probably are true. Wieman’s book serves as an excellent example of the liberal thought which dominated much of theology and philosophy-of-religion during the last part of the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth. The religious thinker with a liberal perspective conceives his primary challenge as developing a scientifically acceptable interpretation of religious experience, taking that experience itself as being obvious and almost universally recognized. One need not be particularly well read to know that current judgments regarding the obviousness of religious experience are hardly so sanguine, however, and that the religious thinker typical of our own age therefore conceives his primary challenge quite differently.—J. M. V.
Similar books and articles
Oakeshott on the Character of Religious Experience: Need There Be a Conflict Between Science and Religion?Timothy Fuller - 2009 - Zygon 44 (1):153-167.
John Dewey and the Role of Scientific Method in Aesthetic Experience.James Scott Johnston - 2002 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 21 (1):1-15.
Religious Experience and Scientific Method.Henry Nelson Wieman - 1926 - Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press.
Lewis on Experience, Reason, and Religious Belief.Eugene Thomas Long - 1981 - Review of Metaphysics 35 (1):87 - 109.
Mysticism, Anomaly, and Theology: Revisiting Wieman's "Religious Experience and Scientific Method".Joshua Braley - 2006 - American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 27 (1):32 - 55.
Real Law in Charles Peirce's Pragmaticism.Catherine Legg - 1999 - In Howard Sankey (ed.), Causation and Laws of Nature. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 125--142.
Metaphor, Religious Language, and Religious Experience.Victoria S. Harrison - 2007 - Sophia 46 (2):127-145.
Husserl on Scientific Method and Conceptual Change: A Realist Appraisal.Darrin W. Belousek - 1998 - Synthese 115 (1):71-98.
Scientific Naturalism and the Neurology of Religious Experience.Matthew Ratcliffe - 2003 - Religious Studies 39 (3):323-345.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads