Argument from Religious Experience

Argument from Religious Experience

1. Inductive Argument

   • If something is experienced, it must exist
     • People experience God
       • God must exist
       • This is not necessarily true - Subjective (the experience can't be verified)
         • Contingent truth - If the claims of people having religious experiences are not correct, then the conclusion is not true
       • Direct Awareness - You have experienced it therefore you know it to be true
       • Mental Illnesses
       • Intoxication
       • Senses decieved
     • An Empiricist view
       • Based on sense experience
   • As it is an inductive argument, it can never be considered as proof but can be persuasive

2. Swinburne's Theory of Testimony and Credulity

   • Testimony
     • The account of the experience
       • Believe the person unless there is a reason not to
         • E.g - lying would be beneficial to them, they are a known liar, they are mentally ill or they are intoxicated
     • Can be very certain with a group experience
   • Credulity
     • Credibility
     • The experience itself
       • If 'x' seems present, 'x' is probably present
         • Unless there is reason not to believe them, again

3. The Cumulative Argument

   • The idea that if you put all of the arguments for the existence of God together, it creates an argument that is total proof that God exists
   • Teleological/Design Argument
     • Cosmological Argument
       • Ontological Argument (Existence)
         • Moral Argument
           • Religious Experience
             • = Sound Argument
   • The counter for this argument is the Leaky Bucket argument
     • The idea that all of these arguments on their own are full of holes, putting them together doesn't fix the holes, it creates more