Wednesday, August 31, 2022

Argument from Religious Experience (for existence of God)

I am going to make a multi-part discussion on the evidence for the existence of God. This is because I'm sick of atheists saying there isn't any. I am goimg to discuss my version of the five proofs. These are the one's I like best. I do not argue to prove that God exists but to show that bleief is warranted through reason and other evidence.Here are the five arguments I will discusss:

1 Argument from Religious experiece (codetermenate)
2 Argumemt from Transcendental signifiers
3 The Cosmological argumemt
4 The Fine tuning argumemt
5 Hartshorne's Modal argument

http://www.doxa.ws/experience/mystical.html

Argument

(1)There are real affects from Mystical experince.

(2)These affects cannot be reduced to naturalistic cause and affect, bogus mental states or epiphenomena.

(3)Since the affects of Mystical consciousness are independent of other explaintions we should assume that they are genuine.

(4)We should assume that the object is real since the affects are real, or that the affects are the result of some higher reailty.

(5)The true measure of the reality of the co-dterminate is the transfomrative power of the affects (ie what it does in your life).

Actually my favorite version of this argumemt is what I call the Thomas Reid argumemt. It invovles the background data, For moreimfo on this versioon see Here.


(1) we trust perceptions that work for us in navigating the world

(2) we juge by criteria: Refular, Cinsistant,and shared.

(3) RE fits this criteria

(4 )enables navigation

(5) :. we are warranted to trust RE as indicative of a real object which is transformative in thyelivesof believers.


Analysis:

Real Affects of Mystical Experince Imply Co-determinate

A. Study and Nature of Mystical Experiences

Mystical experince is only one aspect of religious experince, but I will focuss on it in this argument. Most other kinds of religious expeince are difficult to study since they are more subjective and have less dramatic results. But mystical experince can actually be measured empirically in terms of its affects, and can be compared favorably to other forms of conscious states.It displys these aspects:

1) Primarily Religious

Transpersonal Childhood Experiences of Higher States of Consciousness: Literature Review and Theoretical Integrationm (unpublished paper 1992 by Jayne Gackenback

http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/cehsc/ipure.htm

Gackenback website is Spiritwatch

Quotes:

"The experience of pure consciousness is typically called "mystical". The essence of the mystical experience has been debated for years (Horne, 1982). It is often held that "mysticism is a manifestation of something which is at the root of all religions (p. 16; Happold, 1963)." The empirical assessment of the mystical experience in psychology has occurred to a limited extent."

2) Defining charactoristics.

[Gackenback]

"In a recent review of the mystical experience Lukoff and Lu (1988) acknowledged that the "definition of a mystical experience ranges greatly (p. 163)." Maslow (1969) offered 35 definitions of "transcendence", a term often associated with mystical experiences and used by Alexander et al. to refer to the process of accessing PC."

Lukoff (1985) identified five common characteristics of mystical experiences which could be operationalized for assessment purposes. They are:

1. Ecstatic mood, which he identified as the most common feature;
2. Sense of newly gained knowledge, which includes a belief that the mysteries of life have been revealed;
3. Perceptual alterations, which range from "heightened sensations to auditory and visual hallucinations (p. 167)";
4. Delusions (if present) have themes related to mythology, which includes an incredible range diversity and range;
5. No conceptual disorganization, unlike psychotic persons those with mystical experiences do NOT suffer from disturbances in language and speech. It can be seen from the explanation of PC earlier that this list of qualities overlaps in part those delineated by Alexander et al.

3)Studies use Empirical Instruments.

Many skeptics have argued that one cannot study mystical experince scientifically. But it has been done many times, in fact there are a lot of studies and even empirical scales for measurement.

(Ibid.)

Quote:

"Three empirical instruments have been developed to date. They are the Mysticism Scale by Hood (1975), a specific question by Greeley (1974) and the State of Consciousness Inventory by Alexander (1982; Alexander, Boyer, & Alexander, 1987). Hood's (1975) scale was developed from conceptual categories identified by Stace (1960). Two primary factors emerged from the factor analysis of the 32 core statements. First is a general mysticism factor, which is defined as an experience of unity, temporal and spatial changes, inner subjectivity and ineffability. A second factor seems to be a measure of peoples tendency to view intense experiences within a religious framework. A much simpler definition was developed by Greeley (1974), "Have you ever felt as though you were very close to a powerful, spiritual force that seemed to lift you out of yourself?" This was used by him in several national opinion surveys. In a systematic study of Greeley's question Thomas and Cooper (1980) concluded that responses to that question elicited experiences whose nature varied considerably. Using Stace's (1960) work they developed five criteria, including awesome emotions; feeling of oneness with God, nature or the universe; and a sense of the ineffable. They found that only 1% of their yes responses to Greeley's question were genuine mystical experiences. Thus Hood's scale seems to be the more widely used of these two broad measures of mysticism. It has received cross cultural validation" (Holm, 1982; Caird, 1988).

4) Incidence.

(Ibid.)

Quote: "Several studies have looked at the incidence of mystical experiences. Greeley (1974) found 35% agreement to his question while Back and Bourque (1970) reported increases in frequency of these sorts of experiences from about 20% in 1962 to about 41% in 1967 to the question "Would you say that you have ever had a 'religious or mystical experience' that is, a moment of sudden religious awakening or insight?" Greeley (1987) reported a similar figure for 1973".

"The most researched inventory is the State of Consciousness Inventory (SCI; reviewed in Alexander, Boyer, and Alexander, 1987). The authors say "the SCI was designed for quantitative assessment of frequency of experiences of higher states of consciousness as defined in Vedic Psychology (p. 100)."

"In this case items were constructed from first person statements of practitioners of that meditative tradition, but items were also drawn from other authority literatures. Additional subscales were added to differentiate these experiences from normal waking experience, neurotic experience, and schizophrenic experience. Finally, a misleading item scale was added. These authors conceptualize the "mystical" experience as one which can momentarily occur in the process of the development of higher states of consciousness. For them the core state of consciousness is pure consciousness and from it develops these higher states of consciousness.

Whereas most researchers on mystical experiences study them as isolated or infrequent experiences with little if any theoretical "goal" for them, this group contextualizes them in a general model of development (Alexander et al., 1990) with their permanent establishment in an individual as a sign of the first higher state of consciousness. They point out that "during any developmental period, when awareness momentarily settles down to its least excited state, pure consciousness [mystical states] can be experienced (p. 310). " In terms of incidence they quote Maslow who felt that in the population at large less than one in 1,000 have frequent "peak" experiences so that the "full stabilization of a higher stage of consciousness appears to an event of all but historic significance (p. 310)."

"Virtually all of researchers using the SCI are very careful to distinguish the practice of meditation from the experience of pure consciousness, explaining that the former merely facilitates the latter. They also go to great pains to show that their multiple correlation's of health and well-being are strongest to the transcendent experience than to the entire practice of meditation (for psychophysiological review see Wallace, 1987; for individual difference review see Alexander et al., 1987;

B. Long-Term Positive Effects of Mystical Experience

Research Summary

From Council on Spiritual Practices Website

"States of Univtive Consciousness"

Also called Transcendent Experiences, Ego-Transcendence, Intense Religious Experience, Peak Experiences, Mystical Experiences, Cosmic Consciousness. Sources:

Wuthnow, Robert (1978). "Peak Experiences: Some Empirical Tests." Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 18 (3), 59-75.

Noble, Kathleen D. (1987). ``Psychological Health and the Experience of Transcendence.'' The Counseling Psychologist, 15 (4), 601-614. Lukoff, David & Francis G. Lu (1988). ``Transpersonal psychology research review: Topic: Mystical experiences.'' Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 20 (2), 161-184.

Roger Walsh (1980). The consciousness disciplines and the behavioral sciences: Questions of comparison and assessment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137(6), 663-673.

Lester Grinspoon and James Bakalar (1983). ``Psychedelic Drugs in Psychiatry'' in Psychedelic Drugs Reconsidered, New York: Basic Books.

Furthermore, Greeley found no evidence to support the orthodox belief that frequent mystic experiences or psychic experiences stem from deprivation or psychopathology. His ''mystics'' were generally better educated, more successful economically, and less racist, and they were rated substantially happier on measures of psychological well-being. (Charles T. Tart, Psi: Scientific Studies of the Psychic Realm, p. 19.)

Long-Term Effects

Wuthnow:

*Say their lives are more meaningful,
*think about meaning and purpose
*Know what purpose of life is
Meditate more
*Score higher on self-rated personal talents and capabilities
*Less likely to value material possessions, high pay, job security, fame, and having lots of friends
*Greater value on work for social change, solving social problems, helping needy
*Reflective, inner-directed, self-aware, self-confident life style

Noble:

*Experience more productive of psychological health than illness
*Less authoritarian and dogmatic
*More assertive, imaginative, self-sufficient
*intelligent, relaxed
*High ego strength,
*relationships, symbolization, values,
*integration, allocentrism,
*psychological maturity,
*self-acceptance, self-worth,
*autonomy, authenticity, need for solitude,
*increased love and compassion

Short-Term Effects (usually people who did not previously know of these experiences)

*Experience temporarily disorienting, alarming, disruptive
*Likely changes in self and the world,
*space and time, emotional attitudes, cognitive styles, personalities, doubt sanity
and reluctance to communicate, feel ordinary language is inadequate

*Some individuals report psychic capacities and visionary experience destabilizing relationships with family and friends Withdrawal, isolation, confusion, insecurity, self-doubt, depression, anxiety, panic, restlessness, grandiose religious delusions

Links to Maslow's Needs, Mental Health, and Peak Experiences When introducing entheogens to people, I find it's helpful to link them to other ideas people are familiar with. Here are three useful quotations. 1) Maslow - Beyond Self Actualization is Self Transcendence ``I should say that I consider Humanistic, Third Force Psychology to be transitional, a preparation for a still `higher' Fourth Psychology, transhuman, centered in the cosmos rather than in human needs and interest, going beyond humanness, identity, selfactualization and the like.''

Abraham Maslow (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being, Second edition, -- pages iii-iv.

2) States of consciousness and mystical experiences
The ego has problems:
the ego is a problem.

``Within the Western model we recognize and define psychosis as a suboptimal state of consciousness that views reality in a distorted way and does not recognize that distortion. It is therefore important to note that from the mystical perspective our usual state fits all the criteria of psychosis, being suboptimal, having a distorted view of reality, yet not recognizing that distortion. Indeed from the ultimate mystical perspective, psychosis can be defined as being trapped in, or attached to, any one state of consciousness, each of which by itself is necessarily limited and only relatively real.'' -- page 665

Roger Walsh (1980). The consciousness disciplines and the behavioral sciences:
Questions of comparison and assessment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137(6), 663-673.

3) Therapeutic effects of peak experiences

``It is assumed that if, as is often said, one traumatic event can shape a life, one therapeutic event can reshape it. Psychedelic therapy has an analogue in Abraham Maslow's idea of the peak experience. The drug taker feels somehow allied to or merged with a higher power; he becomes convinced the self is part of a much larger pattern, and the sense of cleansing, release, and joy makes old woes seem trivial.'' -- page 132
Lester Grinspoon and James Bakalar (1983). ``Psychedelic Drugs in Psychiatry'' in Psychedelic Drugs Reconsidered, New York: Basic Books.


Transpersonal Childhood Experiences of Higher States of Consciousness: Literature Review and Theoretical Integration. Unpublished paper by Jayne Gackenback, (1992) http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/cehsc/ipure.htm

"These states of being also result in behavioral and health changes. Ludwig (1985) found that 14% of people claiming spontaneous remission from alcoholism was due to mystical experiences while Richards (1978) found with cancer patients treated in a hallucinogenic drug-assisted therapy who reported mystical experiences improved significantly more on a measure of self-actualization than those who also had the drug but did not have a mystical experience. In terms of the Vedic Psychology group they report a wide range of positive behavioral results from the practice of meditation and as outlined above go to great pains to show that it is the transcendence aspect of that practice that is primarily responsible for the changes. Thus improved performance in many areas of society have been reported including education and business as well as personal health states (reviewed and summarized in Alexander et al., 1990). Specifically, the Vedic Psychology group have found that mystical experiences were associated with "refined sensory threshold and enhanced mind-body coordination (p. 115; Alexander et al., 1987)."

(4) Greater happiness

by Michael E. Nielsen, PhD

Many people expect religion to bring them happiness. Does this actually seem to be the case? Are religious people happier than nonreligious people? And if so, why might this be?

Researchers have been intrigued by such questions. Most studies have simply asked people how happy they are, although studies also may use scales that try to measure happiness more subtly than that. In general, researchers who have a large sample of people in their study tend to limit their measurement of happiness to just one or two questions, and researchers who have fewer numbers of people use several items or scales to measure happiness.

What do they find? In a nutshell, they find that people who are involved in religion also report greater levels of happiness than do those who are not religious. For example, one study involved over 160,000 people in Europe. Among weekly churchgoers, 85% reported being "very satisfied" with life, but this number reduced to 77% among those who never went to church (Inglehart, 1990). This kind of pattern is typical -- religious involvement is associated with modest increases in happiness

Argyle, M., and Hills, P. (2000). Religious experiences and their relations with happiness and personality. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 10, 157-172.

Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

11 comments:

JAB128 said...

Oh, geez. Check this out (this was from 2014, but I haven't seen this before):

Reason and Meaning: Arguing with Theists

The highlights:

1. Apparently, Jerry Coyne had an article back then on The New Republic about how God arguments are terrible:

New Republic: The Best Arguments for God's Existence Are Actually Terrible

2. The author of the reason and meaning article said that it's hard to show someone who believes in God as the Ground of Being (they had a link to Paul Tillich's Wikipedia page) that their beliefs are silly because they are cryptic. This person accuses them of being obscurantists.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Of course that is typical. They think God argument's have to be wrong because they are about God. They are into scientism so they only accept science as arguments and not logic. Most God argues are based upon logic and require a background they don't have.

I don't believe they know what makes an argumet good. They seem to think to be good an argument must have lots of scientific facts. Also it must agree with their ideology.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

As for the ground of being thing the major classic arguments are not based upon that. The groaned of being is not a God argumemt it's an idea about the nature of God but it's function is not to convince anyone of God's reality.

Most advanced ideas seem cryptic. That is because they are over the heads of those who are not studied. Being seemingly cryptic to the unstudied is not an indication of being wrong.

JAB128 said...

I am looking at Coyne's article, and what's sad is how he said that Dawkins' The God Delusion allegedly pointed out the lack of evidence for faith.

He also talks about how the vast majority of believers don't read theology, and it is the duty of the atheist to refute arcane theological arguments.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Coyne is an idiot, despite his scientific excellence. I've argued with him directly he knows mothing abut theology, I have a Masters in theology from a major seminary.

I take the God delusion apart in my new book God, Science, ideology, on amazon.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

I've written plenty about the ground of being just google, here's one"

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2020/04/god-ground-of-being.html
ground of being means God is the basis of all that is. The first act of being is God's eternal existence. It's no more cryptic than any other German philosophy,

Eric Sotnak said...

Argument

(1)There are real affects from Mystical experince.

(2)These affects cannot be reduced to naturalistic cause and affect, bogus mental states or epiphenomena.

[This is not obviously true, and stands in need of considerable defense. Also, since we have no known cases of supernatural (or non-naturalistic) causation, it seems one could state with equal justification that "These effects cannot be reduced to any non-naturalistic cause and effect"]

(3)Since the affects of Mystical consciousness are independent of other explaintions we should assume that they are genuine.
[I don't think anyone doubts that the effects of the experiences are genuine.]

(4)We should assume that the object is real since the affects are real, or that the affects are the result of some higher reailty.
[I don't think this is what you want to say. Aren't you suggesting that we should CONCLUDE (not assume) the reality of the putative object of these experiences?]

(5)The true measure of the reality of the co-dterminate is the transfomrative power of the affects (ie what it does in your life).
[This doesn't follow, since it appears to be based on a principle that if belief in X has transformative power, then X is more likely to be real than not.]

From a logical standpoint, the argument here is invalid. It is a set of distinct claims that don't connect to a conclusion by any general logical inference rules. Several additional premises would need to be added to make the argument valid.

But instead of focusing on logical form, I'd rather focus on the substantive content:

Some people believe they have experienced demonic possession or otherwise experienced encounters with demons. These experiences can be very profound in their effects. It seems by the same line of reasoning you've endorsed, we should conclude that demons really exist. Is this an unfair comparison? If so, exactly how? Or do you think demons really exist? Even if you think it isn't absurd to countenance belief in demons, I think you will at least accept that one can justifiably be skeptical of demons and hold that a naturalistic explanation of such experiences is preferable to an explanation that takes demons as real. Again, if you think this comparison isn't fair, I'd be open to hearing why.

Cuttlebones said...

Joe: (2)These affects cannot be reduced to naturalistic cause and affect, bogus mental states or epiphenomena.

[b] When you say affects, you mean the result of having had a Mystical experience?
Not that the Mystical experience itself cannot be reduced to a naturalistic cause, right?
So people have experiences that we label mystical, we cannot explain them therefore God? Is that what you are implying?[/b]

Cuttlebones said...

Hey Kristen. I understand that. But to make any claims for the origin or trigger of such experiences is no more than a guess. We can say that these experiences form part of how we come to conceptualising the idea of God but I think that's about as far as we can go.
I wish I could have such an experience.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

JAB128 said...
I am looking at Coyne's article, and what's sad is how he said that Dawkins' The God Delusion allegedly pointed out the lack of evidence for faith.

He also talks about how the vast majority of believers don't read theology, and it is the duty of the atheist to refute arcane theological arguments.

yes more christians should read theology.too ad more atheists don't read science