In James Maclaurin Greg Dawes (ed.), A New Science of Religion. Routledge (2012)
Ever since Darwin people have worried about the sceptical implications of evolution. If our minds are products of evolution like those of other animals, why suppose that the beliefs they produce are true, rather than merely useful? We consider this problem for beliefs in three different domains: religion, morality, and commonsense and scientific claims about matters of empirical fact. We identify replies to evolutionary scepticism that work in some domains but not in others. One reply is that evolution can be expected to design systems that produce true beliefs in some domain. This reply works for commonsense beliefs and can be extended to scientific beliefs. But it does not work for moral or religious beliefs. An alternative reply which has been used defend moral beliefs is that their truth does not consist in their tracking some external state of affairs. Whether or not it is successful in the case of moral beliefs, this reply is less plausible for religious beliefs. So religious beliefs emerge as particularly vulnerable to evolutionary debunking.
|Keywords||Evolutionary epistemology Philosophy of religion Alvin Pantinga|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Two Types of “Explaining Away” Arguments in the Cognitive Science of Religion.Hans Van Eyghen - 2016 - Zygon 51 (4):966-982.
The Relevance of Hume's Natural History of Religion for Cognitive Science of Religion.Helen De Cruz - 2015 - Res Philosophica 92 (3):653-674.
Religious Belief is Not Natural. Why Cognitive Science of Religion Does Not Show That Religious Belief is Rational.Hans Van Eyghen - 2016 - Studia Humana 5:34-44.
Similar books and articles
When Do Evolutionary Explanations of Belief Debunk Belief?Paul E. Griffiths & John S. Wilkins - forthcoming - In Darwin in the 21st Century.
Evolution, Naturalism, and the Worthwhile: A Critique of Richard Joyce's Evolutionary Debunking of Morality.Christopher Toner - 2011 - Metaphilosophy 42 (4):520-546.
What's Wrong with the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism?Geoff Childers - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):193-204.
Are Evolutionary/Cognitive Theories of Religion Relevant for Philosophy of Religion?Gregory R. Peterson - 2010 - Zygon 45 (3):545-557.
Morality and Mathematics: The Evolutionary Challenge.Justin Clarke-Doane - 2012 - Ethics 122 (2):313-340.
Evolutionary Approaches to Epistemic Justification.Helen de Cruz, Maarten Boudry, Johan de Smedt & Stefaan Blancke - 2011 - Dialectica 65 (4):517-535.
The Evolutionary Social Psychology of Religious Beliefs.Lee A. Kirkpatrick - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (6):741-741.
Evolved Cognitive Biases and the Epistemic Status of Scientific Beliefs.Helen de Cruz & Johan de Smedt - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 157 (3):411-429.
Commonsense Darwinism: Evolution, Morality, and the Human Condition.John Lemos - 2008 - Open Court.
Added to index2012-09-10
Total downloads914 ( #853 of 2,168,944 )
Recent downloads (6 months)98 ( #1,370 of 2,168,944 )
How can I increase my downloads?