3b Analyse by comparison the significance of these views: ‘God spoke to me in a dream.’ and ‘I dreamt that God spoke to me.’ (20)
Introduction
The argument for the existence of God based on religious experience is one of the oldest and most contentious arguments for God's existence. Religious experiences are subjective experiences that individuals interpret as being caused by a divine being or supernatural force. The argument for the existence of God based on religious experience asserts that because people have these experiences, God must exist. However, this argument has been met with a great deal of skepticism and criticism. This essay will analyze the view that the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience fails to prove the existence of God.
Argument
One of the main arguments against the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience is that religious experiences are subjective and cannot be objectively verified. Religious experiences vary greatly from person to person and culture to culture. Some individuals may interpret their experiences as being caused by a divine being, while others may interpret the same experience as being caused by a psychological or physiological phenomenon. This subjectivity makes it difficult to use religious experience as proof of God's existence, as the experience is too personal and cannot be replicated or tested.
Additionally, some scholars argue that religious experiences can be explained by natural phenomena or psychological processes. For example, the famous psychologist Sigmund Freud argued that religious experiences are merely projections of an individual's unconscious desires and fears. In his "The Future of an Illusion" (1927), discusses his views on religion and the nature of religious experiences. Freud argues that religious experiences are not evidence of the existence of God or a supernatural force, but rather are the result of unconscious desires and fears that individuals have repressed or denied. He writes:
"We shall tell ourselves that it would be very nice if there were a God who created the world and was a benevolent Providence, and if there were a moral order in the universe and an after-life; but it is a very striking fact that all this is exactly as we are bound to wish it to be" (p. 25).
Here, Freud is suggesting that people have a deep-seated desire for a benevolent God and a moral universe, and that religious experiences are a way for individuals to project these desires onto an external deity. He further argues that this projection is a defense mechanism against anxiety and existential fear, allowing individuals to find comfort and meaning in the face of life's uncertainties. He writes:
"Theology is anthropology, or anthropology is theology; the object of both is one and the same, namely, man himself, his essence and his existence, his nature and his history, his consciousness and his self-consciousness" (p. 6).
Here, Feuerbach is suggesting that religious experiences are a product of human nature and consciousness, rather than a reflection of an external divine being. He argues that human beings create gods and religions as a way to express their own ideals and values, and that religious experiences are simply a manifestation of this projection.
Similarly, the philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach argued that religious experiences are simply projections of human ideals and values onto a divine being. These arguments suggest that religious experiences can be explained without resorting to the existence of God.
Counter-Argument
Despite these criticisms, some scholars argue that the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience is valid. They point out that religious experiences are not necessarily irrational or delusional. For example, the philosopher William James argued that religious experiences can be seen as evidence for the existence of God because they are life-changing and transformative experiences. James believed that religious experiences reveal a deeper reality beyond what can be empirically verified and provide individuals with a sense of meaning and purpose.
Another counter-argument is that the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience should not be dismissed simply because it is subjective. Many experiences that we take to be objective, such as emotions, are inherently subjective. The fact that a religious experience is subjective does not necessarily mean that it is not a valid experience or that it cannot be used as evidence for the existence of God.
Counter-Counter-Argument
However, these counter-arguments have also been met with criticism. Some scholars argue that religious experiences are not necessarily transformative or life-changing. They point out that individuals can have transformative experiences without resorting to the existence of God. Additionally, the fact that religious experiences are subjective makes it difficult to distinguish between genuine religious experiences and experiences that are merely the result of psychological or physiological processes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience is a contentious issue. While some scholars believe that religious experiences provide evidence for the existence of God, others argue that religious experiences are too subjective and cannot be objectively verified. The fact that religious experiences can be explained by natural phenomena or psychological processes further undermines this argument. Nonetheless, some scholars maintain that religious experiences are valid and transformative experiences that provide evidence for the existence of God. Ultimately, the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience remains a highly debated and controversial topic in the field of philosophy of religion.
References
James, W. (1902). The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. Longmans, Green, and Company.
Freud, S. (1927). The future of an illusion. Hogarth Press.
Feuerbach, L. (1841). The essence of Christianity. John Chapman.