چکیده:
Although 'religious experience' is a pervasive and omnipresent matter, the thought of religious experience is a new and modern phenomenon whose origins trace back to modern Europe and is discussed today as one of the important topics in the philosophy of religion. Religious experience has various dimensions: phenomenological, psychological, and epistemological. The present writing discusses the epistemological dimension of religious experience. The epistemology of religious experience seeks to answer the question of whether religious experience can justify religious belief or not? In response to this question, there are various ways, one of which is analysis based on the nature and essence of religious experience. Therefore, solving this issue will depend somewhat on our description of religious experience. The theories proposed in response to this question can be divided into three major categories: 1. The emotional nature of religious experience, 2. The sensory perception nature of religious experience, and 3. The supernatural nature of religious experience. Based on this, the present article, after presenting introductory discussions regarding religious experience and its meaning and characteristics, examines the epistemological authority of religious experience based on the nature and essence of this experience.
خلاصه ماشینی:
From Schleiermacher's perspective, the philosophy of religion is precisely the reflection on this element (religious experience), in such a way that different traditions and cultures shape it and it manifests itself in various religious teachings and practices.
Broad, William Alston, Richard Swinburne, Keith Ward, and Gary Gutting are among those who have spoken in some way about the reliance of religious belief on religious experience.
1. The Emotional Nature of Religious Experience Schleiermacher, in his influential work, On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers, claimed that religious experience is not a type of cognitive and rational experience, but rather "a feeling of absolute dependence or self-consciousness of an absolutely dependent being.
Critique of the Theory of the Emotional Nature of Religious Experience and the Justification of Religious Belief As was observed, Schleiermacher and those within his intellectual tradition consider religious experience to belong to the category of feeling.
42) The second problem facing this view is how one can, based on feelings and emotions or cognitions, obtain claims of truth and falsehood regarding reality that are found in theology and religious philosophy; that is, if religious experience is ineffable and precedes all concepts and beliefs, how can a theory observing reality be extracted from it?
32) Now, given the emotional and affective nature of religious experience, can it be accepted as an epistemological justification for religious belief and proof of the existence of God?
(
, 
, 
)
