Author:
Seitz Rüdiger J.,Angel Hans-Ferdinand,Paloutzian Raymond F.
Abstract
Two categories of mental events – ecstatic or indescribable religious revelations and bizarre beliefs or behavior with related mental abnormalities – have been compared and contrasted in order to understand whether they are manifestations of different basic neural and psychological processes, or fundamentally the same. In popular terms, such comparisons point to the issue of the relationship between being religious and being mentally ill. McCauley and Graham (2020) have argued for a benign “maturational naturalism” (MN) as an over-arching concept to subsume and understand the two approaches. MN rests on the assumption that for purposes of understanding the processes that mediate any “matters of the mind,” it makes no difference whether they are labeled religious or not. All must be functions of maturationally natural processes, or else they would not occur. Whether they are labeled “religious” or “mental illness,” or whether an extra-world agent or spirit was involved, is left for others to discuss. There is a gap in their analysis, however: They refer to beliefs (religious, delusional, evidence-based), but do not adequately clarify the processes from which they spring or what believing is even for. The present article completes the picture by explaining the fundamental processes of believing that underpin all they say, and more. The keyword for the processes of believing is the term credition, a neologistic variant of credible or believable. This article elaborates how believing processes make possible religious, esoteric, and logical and evidence-based beliefs; where they come from and how they are constructed: and what they are good for, i.e., why humans do what is called believing at all.
Reference64 articles.
1. Alcock, J. E. (2018). Belief: What it means to believe and why our convictions are so compelling. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
2. American Psychiatry Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC, American Psychiatry Association. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
3. Amos, A. J. (2012). Call stories III. Islam. In H.-J. Klauck, V. Leppin, B. McGinn, C.-L. Seow, H. Spieckermann, B. D. Walfish, & E. J. Ziolkowski (Eds.) Encyclopedia of the Bible and its reception (vol. 4). https://doi.org/10.1515/EBR.callstories
4. Angel, H.-F. (2013). Religiosity. In A. L. C. Runehov, & L. Oviedo (Eds.). Encyclopedia of sciences and religion (vol. 4, pp. 2012–2014). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8265-8_1503
5. ———. (2020). A history of the evolution of religion: From religion to religiosity to the processes of believing. In J. R. Feierman, & L. Oviedo (Eds.). The evolution of religion, religiosity, and theology (pp. 87-103). London: Routledge.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献