Cited by 53Study and Philosophy of ReligionReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyEvolution and Science Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Why Would Anyone Believe in God?

Barrett, Justin L.·2004·Rowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooks

Abstract

Anyone who wants a concise, clear, and scientific explanation of why anyone would believe in God should pick up Barrett's book.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5040/9798216409243

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Barrett claims that the human theory of mind produces intuitive beliefs in superproperties like omniscience that fit much better with monotheistic beliefs.

    “Furthermore, Barrett also claims that the human theory of mind produces intuitive beliefs in superproperties like omniscience that fit much better with monotheistic beliefs.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett (2004: 77)

  • Barrett leaves open the possibility that not all sightings that lead to belief in ghosts or spirits are illusions.

    “The quote shows that Barrett leaves open the possibility that not all sightings that lead to belief in ghosts or spirits are illusions.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett (2004)

  • HADD can register evidence as resulting from a known agent, thereby encouraging belief in a known supernatural agent rather than producing a new supernatural belief.

    “HADD can register evidence as resulting from a known agent. A storm cloud can be identified as an act of God. In cases like these, HADD does not so much produce a new supernatural belief but rather encourages belief in a known supernatural agent.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett (2004)

  • Barrett does not rank all detected supernatural agents under false positives.

    “In any case, it is clear that Barrett does not rank all detected supernatural agents under false positives.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett (2004)

  • HADD produces many false positives, but not all falsely detected agents are supernatural; subjects also falsely detect non-existing predators, other humans, and inanimate objects as agents.

    “On Barrett's theory, HADD indeed produces many false positives. However, not all falsely detected agents are supernatural; a subject will also often falsely detect non-existing predators or other humans. Humans will also occasionally identify inanimate objects as agents.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett (2004)

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Barrett, J. L.
Corresponding author
Barrett, Justin L.
Venue
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooks
Published
2004
OpenAlex
W4417388183
Cited by
53
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 15
FWCI
0.00
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
Keywords
belief in God, religious beliefs, philosophy of religion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review