The existence of God Based on Religious Experience
In contrast to the classical arguments for the existence of God, namely the ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments, the argument from religious experience doesn’t just entail a set logical of points arriving at a conclusion on a piece of paper, rather it also necessitates sense-based experience, tangible to the individual who experiences the divine.
First and foremost, we must classify the argument from religious experience.
In general, philosophical arguments usually take one …show more content…
Is it really the case that God can be experienced directly; granted that people have what they call “religious experiences”, how can we verify that their cause is God and not some other cause; do the weaknesses of this argument necessarily entail the rejection of the conclusion?
Firstly we can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the argument in terms of its premises. P1 states that “If an entity is directly experienced, it exists”. Arguably, the proof we rely on most of all in the twenty-first century is our own experience. If we have seen, heard or experienced something, we accept the “truth” of whatever it may be. For those philosophers working in the Empiricist tradition (Hume, Bertrand Russell, Dawkins), this is appealing. The premise is an analytic statement – it is generally true by definition -, and therefore would be accepted by Logical Positivists and their Verificationism.
P2 states that “God is the sort of being that can be experienced”. In the Classical Theism espoused by the three Abrahamic faiths, God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent and