Cognitive Regeneration and the Noetic Effects of Sin: Why Theology and Cognitive Science May not be Compatible

Justin Barrett and Kelly James Clark have suggested that cognitive science of religion supports the existence of a god-faculty akin to sensus divinitatis. They propose that God may have given rise to the god-faculty via guided evolution. This suggestion raises two theological worries. First, our nat...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Launonen, Lari (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: University of Innsbruck in cooperation with the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Birmingham 2021
Dans: European journal for philosophy of religion
Année: 2021, Volume: 13, Numéro: 3, Pages: 113-137
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B Doctrine de Dieu / Péché / Noétique / Kognitive Religionswissenschaft
RelBib Classification:AB Philosophie de la religion
AE Psychologie de la religion
NBC Dieu
Sujets non-standardisés:B noetic effects of sin
B evolution of religion
B Prejudice
B cognitive science of religion
B Reformed Epistemology
B Sensus Divinitatis
Accès en ligne: Accès probablement gratuit
Volltext (doi)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Résumé:Justin Barrett and Kelly James Clark have suggested that cognitive science of religion supports the existence of a god-faculty akin to sensus divinitatis. They propose that God may have given rise to the god-faculty via guided evolution. This suggestion raises two theological worries. First, our natural cognition seems to favor false god-beliefs over true ones. Second, it also makes us prone to tribalism. If God hates idolatry and moral evil, why would he give rise to mind with such biases? A Plantingian response would point to the noetic effects of sin. Such a response, however, would have to assume that God is restoring the minds of believers. This paper considers empirical reasons to doubt that such a process is taking place.
Contient:Enthalten in: European journal for philosophy of religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.24204/ejpr.2021.3398