On Naturalness, Innateness, and God-beliefs: A Reply to Shook
Shook (2017) argues that if god-beliefs are “innate,” one is obligated to be skeptical about them by virtue of their mutually incompatible plurality and nativist origin. Second, Shook suggests that even if god-beliefs are not innate, it is still epistemically vicious to believe in gods. Shook also r...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Brill
2017
|
| Dans: |
Method & theory in the study of religion
Année: 2017, Volume: 29, Numéro: 4/5, Pages: 374-386 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
神
/ 信念
/ 天赋观念
/ 自然宗教
/ Kognitive Religionswissenschaft
|
| RelBib Classification: | AA Sciences des religions AB Philosophie de la religion AE Psychologie de la religion |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
cognitive science of religion
epistemology
god-beliefs
innate
religion
|
| Accès en ligne: |
Accès probablement gratuit Volltext (Verlag) |
| Résumé: | Shook (2017) argues that if god-beliefs are “innate,” one is obligated to be skeptical about them by virtue of their mutually incompatible plurality and nativist origin. Second, Shook suggests that even if god-beliefs are not innate, it is still epistemically vicious to believe in gods. Shook also raises concerns about using theology to motivate or interpret scientific inquiry. This response essay clarifies the character of the theories offered in the cognitive science of religion (csr), including rejecting that innateness of god-beliefs is a common view. Shook’s primary claims are then evaluated with the conclusion that they are not adequately argued or substantiated. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0682 |
| Référence: | Kommentar zu "Are People Born to be Believers, or are Gods Born to be Believed? (2017)"
Kommentar in "God Belief as an Innate Aspect of Human Nature: A Response to John Shook and Questions for Justin Barrett (2017)" Kommentar in "Reply to Commentaries on “Are People Born to be Believers, or are Gods Born to be Believed?” (2017)" |
| Contient: | In: Method & theory in the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341399 |