Argument from personal experience
From Iron Chariots Wiki
Revision as of 21:20, 18 November 2007 by Tatarize
- 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.