What is the relationship between religious experience and religious belief, and can experience justify faith?
Religious experience and belief: the role of experience in grounding and sustaining faith, public versus private evidence, the value of the effects of experience, and whether experience can justify belief for others.
The relationship between religious experience and belief in SQA Advanced Higher RMPS. Covers how experience grounds and sustains faith, the difference between justifying one's own belief and others', the value of the effects of experience, and whether religious experience can justify belief, with evaluation.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this key area is asking
The area closes by asking about the relationship between religious experience and belief: what role experience plays in grounding and sustaining faith, the crucial difference between public and private evidence, the value of the effects of experience, and whether experience can justify belief (and for whom). This dot point pulls the area together by turning from "is the argument sound?" to "what does experience actually do for belief?"
Grounding and sustaining faith
This role is partly psychological and existential, not only evidential: experience gives faith its felt reality and motivating power. A strong answer notes that this is a different question from whether experience proves God, even though the two are related.
Public versus private evidence
This asymmetry is the key to the whole question. The same experience can be reasonable to believe on for the subject while remaining inconclusive for everyone else, which is why religious experience works better as a ground for personal faith than as a public argument.
The value of the effects
The effects matter because they are observable where the experience itself is private, offering a partial public handle on something otherwise inaccessible. But the inference from "good fruits" to "genuine experience of God" is limited, and evaluation should mark that gap.
Can experience justify belief?
The verdict turns on the standard of justification demanded and on whose belief is in question. For the subject, religious experience can be strong, even sufficient grounds: it is reasonable to believe what you seem to experience unless you have reason not to. For others, it offers at most modest, defeasible support, weakened by naturalistic explanations, conflicting claims and privacy. A strong conclusion therefore distinguishes the two cases: experience can justify belief firmly for the person who has it while remaining inconclusive as a public proof, which is a more defensible position than a single yes or no.
Worked example
Try this
Q1. Why can religious experience justify belief more strongly for the person who has it than for others? [2 marks]
- Cue. The subject has direct experience and may apply the principle of credulity; others rely on testimony about a private, unverifiable experience, which gives weaker, defeasible grounds.
Q2. What does James's test of "fruits" show, and what is its limit? [2 marks]
- Cue. That good effects give some reason to take an experience seriously; the limit is that good effects show value, not a true cause, since a false belief can also bear good fruit.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of SQA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
SQA AH (Religious Experience)20 marksCan religious experience justify religious belief? Discuss with reference to the difference between the believer and others.Show worked answer →
A strong essay distinguishes justifying one's own belief from justifying belief for others, and reaches a judgement.
Explain that religious experience may justify belief in two different roles. For the person who has the experience, it can be powerful, even rationally compelling grounds: by the principle of credulity it seems they are experiencing God, so for them belief is reasonable, and the experience can ground and sustain a whole life of faith. For others, who rely on testimony, the justification is weaker: they did not have the experience, the report is private and unverifiable, and naturalistic and conflicting-claims challenges apply, so testimony gives at best modest, defeasible evidence. Bring in the value of the effects (James's fruits): an experience that transforms a life for the good gives some reason to take it seriously, though good effects do not guarantee a true cause. Evaluate: experience can justify belief strongly for the subject and weakly for others, and whether that is enough depends on the standard of justification demanded. Conclude with a judgement that distinguishes the first-person and third-person cases rather than giving one verdict for both.
SQA AH (Religious Experience)12 marksExplain the difference between religious experience justifying belief for the person who has it and for someone who hears about it.Show worked answer →
The marks reward a clear account of the first-person / third-person distinction and why it matters.
For the person who has the experience, the experience is direct: it seems to them that they are encountering God, and by the principle of credulity they are entitled to take it as probably genuine in the absence of special reasons to doubt, so it can be strong, even sufficient grounds for their own belief and can sustain their faith. For someone who only hears about it, the evidence is indirect: they rely on the principle of testimony, but the experience is private, unrepeatable and unverifiable, and it is subject to naturalistic and conflicting-claims objections, so it offers them weaker, defeasible grounds. The distinction matters because the same experience can be reasonable to believe on for the subject while remaining inconclusive for everyone else, which is why the argument from religious experience is stronger as a ground for personal faith than as a public proof. A full answer explains both roles and the reason for the asymmetry.
Related dot points
- The nature and types of religious experience: mystical, conversion, numinous, corporate and revelatory experiences, with key examples and the features (ineffability, noetic quality) that mark them.
What religious experience is in SQA Advanced Higher RMPS. Covers the main types (mystical, conversion, numinous, corporate, revelatory), James's marks of mystical experience (ineffability, noetic quality, transiency, passivity), Otto's numinous, and key examples, with how to analyse them.
- The argument from religious experience: the inductive argument that experiences count as evidence for God, Swinburne's principles of credulity and testimony, and James's empirical case.
The argument from religious experience for God in SQA Advanced Higher RMPS. Covers the inductive argument that experiences are evidence for God, Swinburne's principles of credulity and testimony, James's empirical case from The Varieties of Religious Experience, and how to evaluate it.
- Challenges to religious experience: psychological and physiological explanations (Freud, neuroscience), the problem of conflicting claims across religions, and verification and the privacy of experience.
The challenges to religious experience in SQA Advanced Higher RMPS. Covers psychological explanations (Freud), physiological and neuroscientific explanations, the problem of conflicting claims across religions, and verification and privacy, with how to evaluate them against the argument.
- The course structure: two areas of study (Philosophy of Religion mandatory plus one optional area), the 90-mark question paper of extended essays, the 50-mark dissertation, and the 140-mark total graded A to D.
How SQA Advanced Higher RMPS is structured and assessed. Covers the two areas of study (Philosophy of Religion plus one optional area), the 90-mark question paper of extended essays, the 50-mark project-dissertation, the 140-mark total, and what the marker rewards.
- The existence of God: theism, atheism and agnosticism, the burden of proof, and the distinction between a priori and a posteriori arguments that frames the cosmological, teleological and ontological arguments.
How the existence of God is debated in SQA Advanced Higher RMPS Philosophy of Religion. Covers theism, atheism and agnosticism, the burden of proof, and the distinction between a priori and a posteriori arguments that frames the cosmological, teleological and ontological arguments.