A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

Pihlström, Sami

doi:10.1163/1570068054922830

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Darwin was discussed, on the one hand, in the light of historical responses (Gregersen and Kjærgaard ; Hjermitslev ; Hellström ) and, on the other hand, more connected to contemporary perspectives, for instance, to neo‐Darwinism (Stenmark ; Thorvaldsen and Øhrstrøm ; Gregersen ). Some of the research was concentrated on philosophical thinkers such as George Berkeley (Airaksinen ) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (Pihlström ). It must be noted that many of the analyzed thinkers could be classified either as philosophers or natural scientists, such as the polymath Pierre Duhem, whose thoughts on “the physics of the believer” were analyzed, for example, by Helge Kragh ().…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Research on Science and Religion in Nordic Countries

Vuolanto¹,

Nissilä²,

Qadir³

2020

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a review of the literature on science and religion in Nordic countries. Seventy-seven articles, books, and chapters on the topic were collected from five major scholarly databases between 1997 and 2018. We scrutinized how research in this data set was engaged with social scientific research. Most of the research was not social scientific. It was primarily philosophical, theological, and historical research; very little presented empirical and theoretical social scientific research. The studies reflected societal discussions, bringing out some cultural dimensions and social issues, but not specifically in the Nordic context. Some societal aspects were highlighted, such as ethics and climate change, but these were not necessarily tied to the Nordic societies. We propose that in the Nordic context there seems to be a need for social scientific research on science and religion. This research could use theoretical perspectives from, for instance, sociology, science and technology studies, higher education studies, and anthropological research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Research on Science and Religion in Nordic Countries

Vuolanto¹,

Nissilä²,

Qadir³

2020

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This contrasts with Michael Dummett's (1996) equally well-known view that realism is a semantic issue about whether statements of certain types (e.g., about the past) have truth values that are objectively determined. I critically discuss Fine's NOA from the point of view of the philosophy of religion in Pihlström (2005b). Obviously, there are many different varieties of atheism available in the discussion; see, for a detailed and influential investigation, Martin (1990).…”

Section: A Pragmatist Approach To Religious Realism Objectivity Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pragmatic Realism, Religious Truth, and Antitheodicy: On Viewing the World by Acknowledging the Other

Pihlström

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and Ulf Zackariasson, as well as a number of students of theology and philosophy who have attended my classes on pragmatism, realism, and the problem of evil and suffering, or my graduate and undergraduate seminars, at the Faculty of Theology, University of Helsinki, in 2016-2019. (If I accidentally forgot to mention someone, which is perfectly possible, I sincerely apologize!) Helsinki, December 2019 Sami Pihlström xvi Pragmatic Realism, Religious Truth, and Antitheodicy We may, I suggest, identify two key 'promises' of pragmatism in the philosophy of religion. These are based on two different philosophical interests in the study of religion, which can be labeled the 'epistemic interest' and the 'existential interest'. The topics of realism, truth, and objectivity-to be explored more comprehensively in the chapters that follow-are fundamental with regard to both. Philosophy of religion could even be considered a test case for pragmatist views on these issues, because religion is often taken to be too personal and 'subjective' to be taken seriously by scientifically minded thinkers pursuing truth and objectivity. Pragmatists themselves are not innocent to this: as we recall, in The Varieties of Religious Experience, James (1958 [1902]) proposed to study the subjective, experiential phenomena that people go through individually, thus arguably neglecting the more social dimensions of religious experience that Dewey emphasized in A Common Faith (Dewey 1991 [1934]). First, it is extremely important, for a thinking person in a modern (or 'postpostmodern') 1 society largely based on scientific research and its various applications, to examine the perennial epistemic problem of the rationality (or irrationality) of religious belief. This problem arises from the-real or apparent-conflicts between science and religion, or reason and faith. It is obvious that this problem, or set of problems, crucially involves the notions of objectivity and truth: religious faith is often regarded as subjective, whereas scientific research and theory construction pursuing truth are objective. Therefore, typically, scientific atheists criticize religion for its lack of solid grounding, while defenders of religion may try to counter this critique by suggesting either that religious beliefs do have objective credentials, after all (e.g., traditionally and rather notoriously, in terms of the 'proofs' of God's existence, which would allegedly be objective enough for any rational inquirer to endorse), or that science is also 'subjective' in some specific sense, or at least more subjective than standard scientific realists would admit (e.g., as argued in various defenses of relativism or social constructivism). The notions of objectivity and rationality are of course distinct, but they are closely related in this area of inquiry in particular. It is precisely because of its pursuit of objectivity that the scientific method is generally regarded as 'rational' , whereas religious ways of thinking might seem to be irrational because of their lack o...

show abstract

“…See, among Quine's many works, his last book,Quine (1995); on analogous (though largely neglected) issues in "religious naturalism", seePihlström (2005a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Religion and pseudo-religion: an elusive boundary

Pihlström

2007

Int J Philos Relig

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the possibility of setting a boundary between religion and "pseudo-religion" (or superstition). Philosophers of religion inspired by Ludwig Wittgenstein's ideas, in particular, insist that religious language-use can be neither legitimated nor criticized from the perspective of non-religious language-games. Thus, for example, the "theodicist" requirement that the existence of evil should be theoretically reconciled with theism can be argued to be pseudo-religious (superstitious). Another example discussed in the paper is the relation between religion and morality. The paper concludes by reflecting on the issue of relativism arising from the Wittgensteinian contention that the religion vs. pseudo-religion division can only be drawn within a religious framework, and on Wittgenstein's own suggestion that the religious person "uses a picture".

show abstract

A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

Cited by 5 publications

References 25 publications

Social Research on Science and Religion in Nordic Countries

Social Research on Science and Religion in Nordic Countries

Pragmatic Realism, Religious Truth, and Antitheodicy: On Viewing the World by Acknowledging the Other

Religion and pseudo-religion: an elusive boundary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About