Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In this article, evidentialism is refuted by relying on William James’ article ‘The Will to Believe’. After an introduction into the notion of ‘evidentialism’ and James’ attack on it (section 1), I distinguish between two sorts of evidentialisms, truth-oriented evidentialism and quiescent evidentialism (2.1). In 2.3-2.5, I criticize these forms of evidentialism on the grounds that the first has very limited applicability and the second leads to absurd consequences when applied in the moral domain. In section 3, the evidentialist challenge to religion is refuted by arguing that, first, truth-oriented evidentialism is of only very limited applicability for criticizing religion and second, that quiescent evidentialism cannot be applied in certain situations (3.2.1), particular religious claims being among them (3.2.2).
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationArs Disputandi
Pagesseção/subtítulo
Publication statusPublished - 2003

Publication series

NameArs Disputandi
Volume3

Fingerprint

Evidentialism
William James
Religion
Attack

Keywords

  • Ciência da Religião Experiência William James Evid

Cite this

Grube, D-M. (2003). Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James. In Ars Disputandi (pp. seção/subtítulo). (Ars Disputandi; Vol. 3).
@inbook{3ac0237f52ab4d158994267452ee9b48,
title = "Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James",
abstract = "In this article, evidentialism is refuted by relying on William James’ article ‘The Will to Believe’. After an introduction into the notion of ‘evidentialism’ and James’ attack on it (section 1), I distinguish between two sorts of evidentialisms, truth-oriented evidentialism and quiescent evidentialism (2.1). In 2.3-2.5, I criticize these forms of evidentialism on the grounds that the first has very limited applicability and the second leads to absurd consequences when applied in the moral domain. In section 3, the evidentialist challenge to religion is refuted by arguing that, first, truth-oriented evidentialism is of only very limited applicability for criticizing religion and second, that quiescent evidentialism cannot be applied in certain situations (3.2.1), particular religious claims being among them (3.2.2).",
keywords = "Ci{\^e}ncia da Religi{\~a}o Experi{\^e}ncia William James Evid",
author = "Dirk-Martin Grube",
year = "2003",
language = "English",
isbn = "1566-5399",
series = "Ars Disputandi",
pages = "se{\cc}{\~a}o/subt{\'i}tulo",
booktitle = "Ars Disputandi",

}

Grube, D-M 2003, Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James. in Ars Disputandi. Ars Disputandi, vol. 3, pp. seção/subtítulo.

Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James. / Grube, Dirk-Martin.

Ars Disputandi. 2003. p. seção/subtítulo (Ars Disputandi; Vol. 3).

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James

AU - Grube, Dirk-Martin

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - In this article, evidentialism is refuted by relying on William James’ article ‘The Will to Believe’. After an introduction into the notion of ‘evidentialism’ and James’ attack on it (section 1), I distinguish between two sorts of evidentialisms, truth-oriented evidentialism and quiescent evidentialism (2.1). In 2.3-2.5, I criticize these forms of evidentialism on the grounds that the first has very limited applicability and the second leads to absurd consequences when applied in the moral domain. In section 3, the evidentialist challenge to religion is refuted by arguing that, first, truth-oriented evidentialism is of only very limited applicability for criticizing religion and second, that quiescent evidentialism cannot be applied in certain situations (3.2.1), particular religious claims being among them (3.2.2).

AB - In this article, evidentialism is refuted by relying on William James’ article ‘The Will to Believe’. After an introduction into the notion of ‘evidentialism’ and James’ attack on it (section 1), I distinguish between two sorts of evidentialisms, truth-oriented evidentialism and quiescent evidentialism (2.1). In 2.3-2.5, I criticize these forms of evidentialism on the grounds that the first has very limited applicability and the second leads to absurd consequences when applied in the moral domain. In section 3, the evidentialist challenge to religion is refuted by arguing that, first, truth-oriented evidentialism is of only very limited applicability for criticizing religion and second, that quiescent evidentialism cannot be applied in certain situations (3.2.1), particular religious claims being among them (3.2.2).

KW - Ciência da Religião Experiência William James Evid

M3 - Chapter

SN - 1566-5399

T3 - Ars Disputandi

SP - seção/subtítulo

BT - Ars Disputandi

ER -

Grube D-M. Refuting the Evidentialist Challenge to Religion: A Critique Inspired by William James. In Ars Disputandi. 2003. p. seção/subtítulo. (Ars Disputandi).