Whether or not God exists is one of the most foundational questions humans have asked. While the traditional scientific viewpoint is that conclusively demonstrating whether or not there is a God is impossible, a number of philosophical and theological arguments have emerged that have attempted to do just that – recognize that God does exist and prove it through an argument. Soren Kierkegaard was one such philosopher. He argued that while God exists, his existence could not be proven and only grasped through faith. Other philosophers and theologians have gone even farther than Kierkegaard and have argued that God’s existence can be proven through religious experience. Seminal 19th century philosopher Williams James is one such individual. James’ argument from religious experience was that while God’s existence may not be easily discernable, the fact that humans have religious experiences constitutes proof of his existence. Although many thinkers have embraced James’ argument, a considerable amount more have argued that this perspective is erroneous as it does not take into consideration the full spectrum of philosophical reasoning. When one considers the objections to the argument from religious experience they demonstrate that while God may exist, it is not possible to prove his existence merely from one’s perceived experienced of him.
Perhaps the most compelling argument against the argument for religious experience relates to the fact that there are countless world religions, many with conflicting perspectives on the world and spirituality. For instance, although Christianity emerged from Judaism, adherents of these religious have conceptualized different visions of God. The same is true of differentiations between Christianity and Buddhism, or Buddhism and Islam. With so many different religions in the world, it is almost impossible to speak of one God, let alone prove his existence through experience of him. Namely, “adherents of all religions claim to have had experiences that validate those religions. If any of these appeals to experience is valid, then surely all are” (Philosophyofreligion). However, while one religious experience may be valid for a specific religion, who is to say that this experience of God is not similarly valid in another religion. This opposition shows – at the minimum – that the argument to religious experience is not capable of demonstrating the conclusive existence of God within a specific religious doctrine.
Another substantial objection to the argument from religious experience that further signifies to individuals that this argument is not a valid means of proving the existence of God is that human perception is difficult to rely upon. For instance, oftentimes humans believe they are interpreting the occurrence of something one way, when in actuality this thing is an illusion. One considers that, “Many of those who do claim religious experiences and visions prepare themselves by food or sleep deprivation, isolation from human contact, the repetition of chants or prayer, and even the use of drugs” (Argumentsforatheism.com). When one recognizes that these outside elements are incorporated into the human mind or body to produce these experiences, it is not difficult to question if it is these outside factors or if it is the actual existence of God they are experiencing.
Similarly, even in instances when people don’t actively or consciously consume drugs or deprive themselves of sleep, one there are a multitude of factors that may contribute to these individuals have unique experiences. In this sense, the argument from religious experience does not appear to be applying the strong standards of science or philosophy to consider what truly constitutes religious experience. Subsequently, when this experience is broken down, at its core it simply means an experience that someone has that they themselves have attributed to God or religion. If such an argument were truly valid, the “experience” would not have to be based on an individual’s subject experience of the event, but rather contingent on an objective set of factors that demonstrated conclusively that God and experience are concomitant; whether or not developing such a criteria is possible seems highly unlikely.
Finally, one recognizes that just as human perception is flawed so are humans’ understandings of the outside world. One considers that, “There are no independent criteria we can use to separate the genuine experiences from false or flawed experiences not only in the reports of others, but in ourselves” (Cline). That is, while all humans may be in agreement that a chair is a chair, the possibility exists that this chair is simply an illusion and that humanity as an erroneous perception of this item. The seminal philosopher Descartes raised a similar dilemma in relation to whether humans can know they are truly alive or just dreaming. Although Descartes’ reasoned that it would be possible to conclusively say yes to this question, his reasoning seems questionable. Because of the philosophical challenges that are associated with determining objective reality, when humans are experiencing an outside event, it appears that there is little recourse to be able to precisely say that this outside event – no matter that it appears to be God – is actually the existence of God. Because of this, God’s existence cannot be accepted from one’s experience of him or her.
In conclusion, this research has examined whether or not the argument from religious experience is a valid interpretation of whether or not there is a God. Within this spectrum of understanding, the research has argued that substantial objections exist to the argument from religious experience such that it is a fallacious argument. Although the fact that the argument from religious experience may not prove the existence of God, it should not be taken to mean that God does not exist – just that humans cannot detect his existence from experience.
Works Cited
Argumentsforatheism.com,. "The Argument From Religious Experience - Arguments For The
Existence Of God - Arguments For Atheism". N.p., 2016. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.
Cline, Austin. "Argument From Religious Experience". About.com Religion & Spirituality. N.p.,
2016. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.
Philosophyofreligion.info,. "Philosophy Of Religion » The Argument From Religious
Experience". N.p., 2016. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.
