Array
(
    [fullTitle] => Cognitive Regeneration and the Noetic Effects of Sin: Why Theology and Cognitive Science May not be Compatible
    [abstract] => 
Justin Barrett and Kelly James Clark have suggested that cognitive science of religion supports the existence of a god-faculty akin to sensus divinitatis. They propose that God may have given rise to the god-faculty via guided evolution. This suggestion raises two theological worries. First, our natural cognition seems to favor false god-beliefs over true ones. Second, it also makes us prone to tribalism. If God hates idolatry and moral evil, why would he give rise to mind with such biases? A Plantingian response would point to the noetic effects of sin. Such a response, however, would have to assume that God is restoring the minds of believers. This paper considers empirical reasons to doubt that such a process is taking place.

    [authors] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [givenName] => Lari
                    [affiliation] => University of Helsinki
                )

        )

    [keywords] => Array
        (
            [0] => Cognitive science of religion
            [1] => Noetic effects of sin
            [2] => sensus divinitatis
            [3] => Reformed epistemology
            [4] => Prejudice
            [5] => Evolution of religion
        )

    [doi] => 10.24204/ejpr.2021.3398
    [datePublished] => 2021-08-01
    [pdf] => https://www.philosophy-of-religion.eu/menuscript/index.php/ejpr/article/view/3398/version/762/2824
)
"Loading..."

Cognitive Regeneration and the Noetic Effects of Sin: Why Theology and Cognitive Science May not be Compatible

Lari
University of Helsinki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.2021.3398

Abstract

Justin Barrett and Kelly James Clark have suggested that cognitive science of religion supports the existence of a god-faculty akin to sensus divinitatis. They propose that God may have given rise to the god-faculty via guided evolution. This suggestion raises two theological worries. First, our natural cognition seems to favor false god-beliefs over true ones. Second, it also makes us prone to tribalism. If God hates idolatry and moral evil, why would he give rise to mind with such biases? A Plantingian response would point to the noetic effects of sin. Such a response, however, would have to assume that God is restoring the minds of believers. This paper considers empirical reasons to doubt that such a process is taking place.

Keywords: Cognitive science of religion

Download PDF