Perceiving God

Last updated
Perceiving God
Perceiving God.jpg
Cover
Author William Alston
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Subject Philosophy of religion
Publisher Cornell University Press
Publication date
1991
Media typePrint (Hardcover and Paperback)
Pages336
ISBN 978-0801481550

Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience is a 1991 book about the philosophy of religion by the philosopher William Alston, in which the author discusses experiential awareness of God. The book was first published in the United States by Cornell University Press. The book received positive reviews and has been described as an important, well-argued, and seminal work. However, Alston was criticized for his treatment of the conflict between the competing claims made by different religions.

Contents

Summary

Alston writes that his central thesis is that "experiential awareness of God ... makes an important contribution to the grounds of religious belief." He uses the term "mystical perception" to refer to "putative direct experiential awareness of God." He builds on work by the philosophers Thomas Reid and Ludwig Wittgenstein, and also refers to the work of the philosopher William James. He criticizes the work of the philosopher Wayne Proudfoot, arguing that Proudfoot wrongly construes "mystical experience" as comprising "purely subjective feelings or sensations" combined with an explanation according to which they are due to an agent such as God. [1]

Publication history

Perceiving God was first published by Cornell University Press in 1991. It was published by Cornell Paperbacks in 1993. [2]

Reception

Perceiving God received positive reviews from Terrence W. Tilley in Theological Studies , [3] Brian Hebblethwaite in Modern Theology , [4] the philosopher Keith Ward in Philosophy , [5] Patrick Sherry in Religion , [6] Proudfoot in the Journal of the American Academy of Religion , [7] and Matthias Steup in Noûs , [8] and a mixed review from John F. Post in The Journal of Religion . [9] The book was also discussed by Thomas W. Smythe in Theology Today . [10] In Religious Studies , the book was discussed by Adam Green and Joshua Seigal. [11] [12] In International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, the book received a positive review from the philosopher William Hasker, [13] and was also discussed by Rene Van Woudenberg and by T. Mawson. [14] [15]

Tilley described the book as "arguably the most important investigation of the epistemology of mysticism from a sophisticated analytical-pragmatic perspective" since James's The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902), and essential reading for theologians and philosophers of religion. He considered Alston's argument "elegant and comprehensive", but concluded that it did not ultimately warrant conclusions stronger than those of James, and found it unclear who Alston intended to convince. Nevertheless, he credited Alston with clarifying the issues involved in the justification of religious belief. [3] Hebblethwaite, writing in 1994, described the book as "one of the most important philosophy of religion books to have been published during the last fifteen years". He considered it regrettable that it had received a hostile response from theologians. He praised Alston's discussion of Wittgenstein's epistemology. He criticized Alston's use of the term "mystical perception" to refer to "experiential awareness of God's being or action", arguing that it was potentially confusing. However, he believed that Alston succeeded in demonstrating that mystical perception and sense perception suffer from similar limitations. [4]

Ward wrote that the book was "of the first importance in its field" and would make a useful text for "discussions of topics in epistemology generally and in religion." He credited Alston with helping to "place analytical philosophy of religion in a central role in contemporary philosophy", arguing with "great logical and analytical force", and successfully countering the "over-easy dismissal" of religious experience as a "purely subjective phenomenon". However, he noted that Alston's arguments were contentious, and had reservations about Alston's attempt to base abstract theological beliefs on direct perceptions of God. [5] Sherry described the book as an important work that was the product of much thought and deserved the attention of all philosophers of religion. However, he criticized Alston's treatment of the "apparent conflict between religious experiences in different religions". [6]

Proudfoot credited Alston with providing a "careful study of the epistemic status of claims for a direct awareness of God." However, while he believed the work showed "impressive analytical precision", he found Alston's model of perception and perceptual justification "naive with respect to actual procedures of belief revision". [7] Steup described the book as "terrific" and an example of the "best contemporary epistemology has to offer". He credited Alston with "sharp insights and illuminating argumentative twists." However, he believed that there were problems with Alston's main argument. [8] Post described the book as "redoubtable", and praised Alston's argument that awareness of God is direct in the same way that sense perception of objects is direct. However, he criticized Alton's epistemological position, believing that it needed a better defense than Alston provided, as well as Alston's conceptual analysis, and his treatment of the issues created by the conflicting claims of different religions. [9] Smythe defended Alston's views, arguing that the idea that "there is a nonsensory perceptual awareness of God that provides grounds for religious belief" should be taken seriously. [10]

Green argued that mystical experience should be characterized in terms of "shared attention", which "occurs when one is engaged in an act of attending to something and in doing so one is consciously coordinating with another on what both will attend to", rather than compared to sense perception. [11] Seigal described Perceiving God as a "seminal book". He argued that there is a tension between Alston's thesis "that beliefs about God formed on the basis of mystical perception are prima facie justified" and "a currently popular method for disarming a certain form of the argument from evil". [12] Hasker credited Alston with developing his arguments with "great care and attention to detail." He predicted that Perceiving God would "set the standard for the discussion of its topic for at least the next several years." He believed that it "advances well beyond previous work on the subject, including Alston's own previously published writings" and "offers a wealth of careful analyses, compelling arguments, and forceful claims which will take epistemologists of religion a considerable time to assimilate." [13] Van Woudenberg endorsed Alston's criticism of Proudfoot. However, he argued that from his criticism of Proudfoot, Alston drew the unjustified conclusion that perceiving a "subjective feeling sensation" as something plays no role in religious experience. He also criticized Alston's account of perception. Nevertheless, he concluded that the shortcomings of Alston's theory of perception did not undermine Alston's "overall project". [14] Mawson described the book as "seminal". [15]

The philosopher Alvin Plantinga praised the book, writing that, alongside Divine Nature and Human Language (1999), it was one of Alston's chief works in the philosophy of religion. [16]

Related Research Articles

Philosophy of religion is "the philosophical examination of the central themes and concepts involved in religious traditions". Philosophical discussions on such topics date from ancient times, and appear in the earliest known texts concerning philosophy. The field is related to many other branches of philosophy, including metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomas Reid</span> Scottish philosopher

Thomas Reid was a religiously trained Scottish philosopher best known for his philosophical method, his theory of perception, and its wide implications on epistemology, and as the developer and defender of an agent-causal theory of free will. He also focused extensively on ethics, theory of action and philosophy of mind.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Alston</span> American philosopher (1921–2009)

William Payne Alston was an American philosopher. He is widely considered to be one of the most important epistemologists and philosophers of religion of the twentieth century, and is also known for his work in metaphysics and the philosophy of language. His views on foundationalism, internalism and externalism, speech acts, and the epistemic value of mystical experience, among many other topics, have been very influential. He earned his PhD from the University of Chicago and taught at the University of Michigan, Rutgers University, University of Illinois, and Syracuse University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alvin Plantinga</span> American Christian philosopher

Alvin Carl Plantinga is an American analytic philosopher who works primarily in the fields of philosophy of religion, epistemology, and logic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Swinburne</span> English philosopher and Christian apologist

Richard Granville Swinburne is an English philosopher. He is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford. Over the last 50 years, Swinburne has been a proponent of philosophical arguments for the existence of God. His philosophical contributions are primarily in the philosophy of religion and philosophy of science. He aroused much discussion with his early work in the philosophy of religion, a trilogy of books consisting of The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rudolf Otto</span> German theologian, philosopher and comparative religionist (1869–1937)

Rudolf Otto was an eminent German Lutheran theologian, philosopher, and comparative religionist. He is regarded as one of the most influential scholars of religion in the early twentieth century and is best known for his concept of the numinous, a profound emotional experience he argued was at the heart of the world's religions. While his work started in the domain of liberal Christian theology, its main thrust was always apologetical, seeking to defend religion against naturalist critiques. Otto eventually came to conceive of his work as part of a science of religion, which was divided into the philosophy of religion, the history of religion, and the psychology of religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Naïve realism</span> Idea that the senses provide us with direct awareness of objects as they really are

In philosophy of perception and epistemology, naïve realism is the idea that the senses provide us with direct awareness of objects as they really are. When referred to as direct realism, naïve realism is often contrasted with indirect realism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reformed epistemology</span> School of philosophical thought

In the philosophy of religion, Reformed epistemology is a school of philosophical thought concerning the nature of knowledge (epistemology) as it applies to religious beliefs. The central proposition of Reformed epistemology is that beliefs can be justified by more than evidence alone, contrary to the positions of evidentialism, which argues that while non-evidential belief may be beneficial, it violates some epistemic duty. Central to Reformed epistemology is the proposition that belief in God may be "properly basic" and not need to be inferred from other truths to be rationally warranted. William Lane Craig describes Reformed epistemology as "One of the most significant developments in contemporary religious epistemology ... which directly assaults the evidentialist construal of rationality."

<i>The Varieties of Religious Experience</i> 1902 book by William James

The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature is a book by Harvard University psychologist and philosopher William James. It comprises his edited Gifford Lectures on natural theology, which were delivered at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland between 1901 and 1902. The lectures concerned the psychological study of individual private religious experiences and mysticism, and used a range of examples to identify commonalities in religious experiences across traditions.

A religious experience is a subjective experience which is interpreted within a religious framework. The concept originated in the 19th century, as a defense against the growing rationalism of Western society. William James popularised the concept. In some religions this may result in unverified personal gnosis.

Scholarly approaches to mysticism include typologies of mysticism and the explanation of mystical states. Since the 19th century, mystical experience has evolved as a distinctive concept. It is closely related to "mysticism" but lays sole emphasis on the experiential aspect, be it spontaneous or induced by human behavior, whereas mysticism encompasses a broad range of practices aiming at a transformation of the person, not just inducing mystical experiences.

Keith Edward Yandell was a philosopher of religion who became notable by his teaching and his writings.

<i>Cosmic Consciousness</i> 1901 book by Richard Bucke

Cosmic Consciousness: A Study in the Evolution of the Human Mind is a 1901 book by the psychiatrist Richard Maurice Bucke, in which the author explores the concept of cosmic consciousness, which he defines as "a higher form of consciousness than that possessed by the ordinary man".

The argument from religious experience is an argument for the existence of God. It holds that the best explanation for religious experiences is that they constitute genuine experience or perception of a divine reality. Various reasons have been offered for and against accepting this contention.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to metaphysics:

Wayne Lee Proudfoot is an American scholar of religion and has written several works in that field, specializing in the philosophy of religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul Moser</span> American philosopher (born 1957)

Paul K. Moser is an American philosopher who writes on epistemology and the philosophy of religion. Moser is Professor of Philosophy at Loyola University Chicago and a former editor of the American Philosophical Quarterly.

Ralph Wilbur Hood Jr. is an American psychologist. He serves as Leroy A. Martin Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, where he specializes in the psychology of religion.

Religious epistemology broadly covers religious approaches to epistemological questions, or attempts to understand the epistemological issues that come from religious belief. The questions asked by epistemologists apply to religious beliefs and propositions whether they seem rational, justified, warranted, reasonable, based on evidence and so on. Religious views also influence epistemological theories, such as in the case of Reformed epistemology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scottish common sense realism</span> Realist school of philosophy

Scottish common sense realism, also known as the Scottish school of common sense, is a realist school of philosophy that originated in the ideas of Scottish philosophers Thomas Reid, Adam Ferguson, James Beattie, and Dugald Stewart during the 18th-century Scottish Enlightenment. Reid emphasized man's innate ability to perceive common ideas and that this process is inherent in and interdependent with judgement. Common sense, therefore, is the foundation of philosophical inquiry. Though best remembered for its opposition to the pervasive philosophy of David Hume, Scottish common sense philosophy is influential and evident in the works of Thomas Jefferson and late 18th-century American politics.

References

  1. Alston 1993, pp. 1, 6, 13, 26, 35, 41.
  2. Alston 1993, p. iv.
  3. 1 2 Tilley 1992, pp. 554–556.
  4. 1 2 Hebblethwaite 1994, pp. 116–119.
  5. 1 2 Ward 1994, pp. 110–112.
  6. 1 2 Sherry 1994, pp. 188–190.
  7. 1 2 Proudfoot 1995, pp. 588–591.
  8. 1 2 Steup 1997, pp. 408–420.
  9. 1 2 Post 1993, pp. 427–428.
  10. 1 2 Smythe 2007, pp. 459–468.
  11. 1 2 Green 2009, pp. 455–470.
  12. 1 2 Seigal 2012, pp. 95–100.
  13. 1 2 Hasker 1994, pp. 183–185.
  14. 1 2 Van Woudenberg 1994, pp. 117–124.
  15. 1 2 Mawson 2005, pp. 105–121.
  16. Plantinga 2017, p. 27.

Bibliography

Books
Journals