The proper object of non-doxastic religion: why traditional religion is to be preferred over Schellenberg's simple ultimism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

Taking for granted the view that belief-less, ‘non-doxastic’, engagement with religion is possible, this article discusses the proper object of such religiosity. Its focus is the claim of J. L. Schellenberg that non-doxastic religion should be directed at ’simple ultimism’. I argue that ‘simple ultimism’ is too abstract to allow for alignment with religious reality. Traditional religion is a better choice since it commonly contains religious experience. As long as the veridicality of such experience remains an epistemic possibility, it should guide our non-doxastic commitment. Objections commonly raised against reliance on religious experience become irrelevant on a non-doxastic approach.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)559-574
Number of pages16
JournalReligious Studies: An International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion
Volume55
Issue number4
Early online date2018 May
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Dec

Subject classification (UKÄ)

  • Philosophy
  • Religious Studies

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The proper object of non-doxastic religion: why traditional religion is to be preferred over Schellenberg's simple ultimism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this