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...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Method & theory in the study of religion
Main Author: Barrett, Justin L. 1971- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Brill 2017
In: Method & theory in the study of religion
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B God / Faith / Innate ideas / Natural religion / Kognitive Religionswissenschaft
RelBib Classification:AA Study of religion
AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
AE Psychology of religion
Further subjects:B cognitive science of religion epistemology god-beliefs innate religion
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Verlag)
Description
Summary: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
Reference: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)"
Contains:In: Method & theory in the study of religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341399