Element contents
Religious Epistemology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 November 2018
Summary
If epistemology is roughly the study of knowledge, justification, warrant, and rationality, then religious epistemology is the study of how these epistemic concepts relate to religious belief and practice. This Element, while surveying various religious epistemologies, argues specifically for Plantingian religious epistemology. It makes the case for proper functionalism and Plantinga's AC models, while it also responds to debunking arguments informed by cognitive science of religion. It serves as a bridge between religious epistemology and natural theology.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781108558365Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 29 November 2018
References
Baker-Hytch, M. (2018). Testimony amidst diversity. In Benton, M. A., Hawthorne, J., and Rabinowitz, D., eds., Knowledge, Belief, and God New Insights in Religious Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 183–202.Google Scholar
Baldwin, E., & McNabb, T. D. (2015). An epistemic defeater for Islamic belief? International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, 76(4), 352–67.Google Scholar
Baldwin, E., & McNabb, T. D. (Forthcoming). Plantingian Religious Epistemology: Problems and Prospects, Lanham: Lexington Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, J. L. (2011). Cognitive Science, Religion, and Theology: From Human Minds to Divine Minds, PA: Templeton Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, J. L. (2017). Religion is kid stuff: Minimally counterintuitive concepts are better remembered by young people. In Hombeck, R. G., Barrett, J. L., & Kang, M., eds., Religious Cognition in China: “Homo Religiosus” and the Dragon. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 125–37.Google Scholar
Bergmann, M. (2002). Common sense naturalism. In Beilby, J., ed., Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 61–90.Google Scholar
Bergmann, M. (2004). What’s NOT wrong with foundationalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LXVIII(1), 164–5.Google Scholar
BonJour, L. (1985). The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Boyce, K., & Moon, A. (2016). In defense of proper functionalism: cognitive science takes on Swampman. Synthese, 123(9), 2987–3001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyce, K., & Plantinga, A. (2012). Proper functionalism. In Cullison, A., ed., Companion to Epistemology. Continuum Press, pp. 124–40.Google Scholar
Casler, K., & Kelemen, D. (2008). Developmental continuity in teleo-functional explanation: Reasoning about nature among Romanian Romani adults. Journal of Cognition and Development, 9(3), 340–62.Google Scholar
Clark, K. J., & Barrett, J. L. (2011). Reidian religious epistemology and the cognitive science of religion. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 79(3), pp. 639–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, W. L., and Sinclair, James. (2009). The kalam cosmological argument. In Craig, W. L. and Moreland, J. P., eds., The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology. Malden, UK: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 101–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. (1987). Knowing one’s own mind. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 60(3), 441–58.Google Scholar
DePoe, J. (2013). In defense of classical foundationalism: A critical evaluation of Plantinga’s argument that classical foundationalism is self-refuting. South African Journal of Philosophy, 245–51.Google Scholar
DePoe, J. (Forthcoming). Classical evidentialism. In DePoe, J. and Dalton, T., eds., Debating Religious Epistemology: An Introduction to Five Views on the Knowledge of God. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Gage, L., & McAllister, B. (Forthcoming). The phenomenal conservative approach to religious epistemology. In DePoe, J. and Dalton, T., eds., Debating Religious Epistemology: An Introduction to Five Views on the Knowledge of God. NY: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. (1992). Philosophy Meets the Cognitive and Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gettier, E. (1963). Is justified true belief knowledge? Analysis, 23 (6), 121–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, S. E. (1993). Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Järnefelt, E., Canfield, C. F., & Kelemen, D. (2015). The divided mind of a disbeliever: intuitive beliefs about nature as purposefully created among different groups of non-religious adults. Cognition, 140, 72–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kane, R. (2005). A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelemen, D. (1999). Why are rocks pointy? Children’s preference for teleological explanations of the natural world. Developmental Psychology, 35(6), 1440–52.Google Scholar
Kelemen, D., & Rosset, E. (2009). The human function compunction: teleological explanation in adults. Cognition, 111(1), 138–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, T. (2005). The epistemic significance of disagreement. In Hawthorne, J., ed., Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 167–96.Google Scholar
Kelly, T. (2010). Peer disagreement and higher order evidence. In Feldman, R. and Warfield, T., eds., Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 111–74.Google Scholar
Kim, J. (2011). Reformed Epistemology and the Problem of Religious Diversity: Proper Function, Epistemic Disagreement, and Christian Exclusivism. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications.Google Scholar
Klein, P. (1999). Human knowledge and the infinite regress of reasons. Philosophical Perspectives, 13(s13), 297–325.Google Scholar
Kundert, C., & Edman, L. R. O. (2017). Testing naturalness theory hypothesis in China. In Hombeck, R. G., Barrett, J. L., and Kang, M., eds., Religious Cognition in China: “Homo Religiosus” and the Dragon. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 77–97.Google Scholar
Kwan, K. (2006). Can religious belief provide justification for belief in God? The debate in contemporary philosophy. Philosophy Compass, 1(6), 640–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, S. (2016). The X-claim argument against religious belief. Religious Studies, 54(1), 15–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrew, T. & McGrew, L. (2006). Internalism and Epistemology: The Architecture of Reason. London: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
McNabb, T. D. (2015). Warranted religion: answering objections to Alvin Plantinga’s epistemology. Religious Studies, 51(4), 477–95.Google Scholar
McNabb, T. D., & Baldwin, E. (2016). Reformed epistemology and the Pandora’s box objection: the Vaisesika and Mormon traditions. Philosophia Christi, 18(2), 451–65.Google Scholar
McNabb, T. D., & Baldwin, E. (2017). Divine methodology: a lawful deflection of Kantian and Kantian-esque defeaters. Open Theology, 3(1), 293–304.Google Scholar
Millikan, R. (1989). In defense of proper functions. Philosophy of Science, 56(2), 288–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, A. (2016). Recent work in reformed epistemology. Philosophy Compass, 11(12), 879–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, A. (2018). How to use cognitive faculties you never knew you had. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 99(s1), 251–75.Google Scholar
Nāgārjuna, , & Garfield, J. (1996). Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nāgārjuna’s ‘mulamadhymakakarika’ with a Philosophical Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norenzayan, A. (2015). Big Gods – How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A., & Tooley, M. (2008). Knowledge of God. MA: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, T. (1983). Essay on the intellectual powers of man. In Beanblossom, R. and Lehrer, K., eds., Thomas Reid’s Inquiry and Essays. IN: Hackett, pp. 281–2.Google Scholar
Rottman, J., Zhu, L., Wang, W., Schillaci, R. S., Clark, K. J., and Kelemen, D. (2017) Cultural Influences on the teleological stance: Evidence from China. Religion, Brain and Behavior, 7(1) 17–26. doi: 10.1080/2153599X.2015.1118402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, K. (2016). Religious disjunctivism. International Journal of Philosophy of Religion, 79(3), 261–79.Google Scholar
Sosa, E. (1991). Knowledge in Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E... (1996). Proper functionalism and virtue epistemology. In Kvanvig, J. L., ed., Warrant in Contemporary Epistemology: Essays in Honor of Plantinga’s Theory of Knowledge. MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 258–59.Google Scholar
Taber, T., & McNabb, T. (2015). Is the problem of divine hiddenness a problem for the reformed epistemologist? The Heythrop Journal, 57(6).Google Scholar
Tolly, J. (Forthcoming). Swampman: A dilemma for proper functionalists. Synthesis.Google Scholar
Wilkins, J. S., & Griffiths, P. E. (2013). Evolutionary debunking arguments in three domains: fact, value, and religion. In Maclaurin, J. and Dawes, G., eds., A New Science of Religion. London: Routledge, pp. 133–46.Google Scholar
Wright, S. (2013). Does Klein’s infinitism offer a response to Agrippa’s Trilemma? Synthese, 190(6), 1113–30.Google Scholar
- 15
- Cited by