Argument from personal experience

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
(Counter-apolegtics)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
An example: "[[Jesus]] appeared to me in a vision, thus I know the doctrine of [[Christianity]] is true."
 
An example: "[[Jesus]] appeared to me in a vision, thus I know the doctrine of [[Christianity]] is true."
  
== Counter-apolegtics==
+
== Counter-apologetics==
  
Personal experiences are [[subjective]], and are not [[evidence]] available to every person.  
+
*Personal experiences are [[subjective]], and are not [[evidence]] available to every person.  
 
+
*Personal experiences are used by [[believer]]s of all [[religion]]s, as well as believers in the [[paranormal]] and [[ghost]]s. It is thus impossible to tell if any religion is valid based on personal experience.
Personal experiences are used by [[believer]]s of all [[religion]]s, as well as believers in the [[paranormal]] and [[ghost]]s. It is thus impossible to tell if any religion is valid based on personal experience.
+
*We know the the mechanics of the [[mind]] can mislead, and the intentional stance often leads people to see agency when there is none.
 
+
*People never report these types of personal revelations from deities that they have had little or no previous cultural exposure to, for example a [[Muslim]] in Saudi Arabia reporting an encounter with the [[Holy Spirit]], or a [[Mormon]] reporting a vision of [[Vishnu]]. This suggests that one's memory of such experiences is heavily influenced by one's pre-existing belief system.
We know the the mechanics of the [[mind]] can mislead, and the intentional stance often leads people to see agency when there is none.
+
*Arguments from personal experience ask that others accept these argument on inferior grounds than the person giving their personal account. One person being told that another person was given a vision of "God and Heaven" is significantly weaker evidence than firsthand visions of "God and Heaven".
 
+
*[[Daniel Dennett]] has argued that one key to the success of arguments from personal experience is that they are personal. One could invent a story and present it as a factual account of their personal experience and one must necessarily point out that the teller of this personal experience is a delusional, a liar, or allow the story to stand as evidence. As generally speaking calling somebody a delusional liar is considered bad form, the stories are often accepted as true.
People never report these types of personal revelations from deities that they have had little or no previous cultural exposure to, for example a [[Muslim]] in Saudi Arabia reporting an encounter with the [[Holy Spirit]], or a [[Mormon]] reporting a vision of [[Vishnu]]. This suggests that one's memory of such experiences is heavily influenced by one's pre-existing belief system.
+
  
 
[[Category:Arguments for the existence of God]]
 
[[Category:Arguments for the existence of God]]

Revision as of 21:20, 18 November 2007

The argument from personal experience is an argument for God's existence on the basis of a personal religious experience.

An example: "Jesus appeared to me in a vision, thus I know the doctrine of Christianity is true."

Counter-apologetics

  • Personal experiences are subjective, and are not evidence available to every person.
  • Personal experiences are used by believers of all religions, as well as believers in the paranormal and ghosts. It is thus impossible to tell if any religion is valid based on personal experience.
  • We know the the mechanics of the mind can mislead, and the intentional stance often leads people to see agency when there is none.
  • People never report these types of personal revelations from deities that they have had little or no previous cultural exposure to, for example a Muslim in Saudi Arabia reporting an encounter with the Holy Spirit, or a Mormon reporting a vision of Vishnu. This suggests that one's memory of such experiences is heavily influenced by one's pre-existing belief system.
  • Arguments from personal experience ask that others accept these argument on inferior grounds than the person giving their personal account. One person being told that another person was given a vision of "God and Heaven" is significantly weaker evidence than firsthand visions of "God and Heaven".
  • Daniel Dennett has argued that one key to the success of arguments from personal experience is that they are personal. One could invent a story and present it as a factual account of their personal experience and one must necessarily point out that the teller of this personal experience is a delusional, a liar, or allow the story to stand as evidence. As generally speaking calling somebody a delusional liar is considered bad form, the stories are often accepted as true.
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox