CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37Study and Philosophy of ReligionEpistemology, Ethics, and MetaphysicsPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

Should CSR Give Atheists Epistemic Assurance? On Beer-Goggles, BFFs, and Skepticism Regarding Religious Beliefs

Open access
Barrett, Justin L., Church, Ian M., The Hegeler Institute·2013·Monist
DOI 10.5840/monist201396314
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recent work in cognitive science of religion (CSR) is beginning to converge on a very interesting thesis—that, given the ordinary features of human minds operating in typical human environments, we are naturally disposed to believe in the existence of gods, among other religious ideas (e.g., see Atran [2002], Barrett [2004; 2012], Bering [2011], Boyer [2001], Guthrie [1993], McCauley [2011], Pyysiainen [2004; 2009]). In this paper, we explore whether such a discovery ultimately helps or hurts the atheist position—whether, for example, it lends credence to ameism by explaining away religious belief or whether it actually strengthens some already powerful arguments against atheism in the relevant philosophical literature. We argue that the recent discoveries of CSR hurt, not help, the atheist position—that CSR, if anything, should not give atheists epistemic assurance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5840/monist201396314

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Any claim that CSR-mechanisms are offtrack has implications that range far wider than supernatural beliefs.

    “He claims that any claim that CSR-mechanisms are offtrack has implications that range far wider than supernatural beliefs.”

    From Is supernatural belief unreliably formed? (2019) · cites this paper as Barrett and Church (2013)

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Barrett, J. L., Church, I. M., & The Hegeler Institute
ORCID
Venue
Monist
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2013
Volume
96
Issue
3
Pages
311-324
ISSN
0026-9662 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5840/monist201396314
OpenAlex
W2049782712
Cited by
37
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.75
Type
journal article
Language
de
Open access
Locations
  • The Monist (publishedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
cognitive science of religion, religious beliefs, atheism, skepticism, epistemology of religion, naturalism

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