Alexander Klein
McMaster University
William James’s religious writing displays a therapeutic concern for two key social problems: an epidemic of suicide among educated Victorians who worried that a scientific worldview left no room for God; and material poverty and bleak employment prospects for others. James sought a conception of God that would therapeutically comfort his melancholic peers while also girding them to fight for better social conditions—a fight he associated with political anarchism. What is perhaps most unique about James’s approach to religion emerges when we consider the relationship of his therapeutic project to his treatment of religious epistemology. For James took his suicidal peers to need more than tea and sympathy. They needed to be convinced, through rational argument, that religious faith is epistemically permissible in light of their methodological naturalism. That is to say that theoretic success in James’s treatment of religion is to be measured by therapeutic success. His argument for epistemic permissibility began by treating religious faith as a “hypothesis.” He took naturalism to permit entertaining a hypothesis just in case it is testable, and not contravened by available evidence. So he developed a distinctive conception of God—what he called the “pluralistic hypothesis”—that proposed a plurality of independent entities in the universe, only one of which is God. In contrast to the monistic hypothesis, pluralism is empirically testable in principle. But crucially, the hypothesis is underdetermined by any evidence available now. This purported, in-principle testability would make religious pluralism epistemically permissible to entertain. And since salvation is possible on this view without being guaranteed, the pluralistic hypothesis stands to discourage social and political quietism.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,677
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Science, Religion, and “The Will to Believe".Alexander Klein - 2015 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 5 (1):72-117.
William James and a Science of Religions.Owen Anderson - 2005 - Review of Metaphysics 59 (2):443-444.
William James and the Right to Over-Believe.William Lad Sessions - 1981 - Philosophy Research Archives 7:996-1045.
Courage, Caution and Heaven’s Gate: Testing James’ Pragmatic Defense of Religious Belief.Guy Axtell - 1999 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1999:77-89.
William James on Ethics and Faith.Michael R. Slater - 2009 - Cambridge University Press.
Deweyan Pragmatism.Randy L. Friedman - 2006 - William James Studies 1.
William James on Ethics and Faith.Michael R. Slater - 2009 - Cambridge University Press.
William James' Viewpoint on Emotional Feelings and Rationality of Religious Beliefs.Mohammad Hadi Shahab - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Theological Research 10 (38):41-58.
William James.Max Carl Otto (ed.) - 1942 - Madison, the University of Wisconsin Press.
William James on Ethics and Faith by Michael R. Slater (Review).Jacob L. Goodson - 2013 - American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 34 (3):285-288.


Added to PP index

Total views
24 ( #442,771 of 2,432,201 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #296,157 of 2,432,201 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes