Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience Book

The two central points that can be taken away for me are the following. The first is the rational way in which faith can be argued for from a philosophical position, via justified true belief in the mystical perceptibility of God, the second is what to look for in supposed personal mystical perceptual revelations - of Christ and/or God - brought about via faith.

The former puts forward the argument that all perceptual systems of belief forming are inherently cyclical when it comes to understanding what it is that one perceives via that sight (e.g. seeing a red tie and believing that I justifiably see a red tie (p.45)) - and thus the concept of sight in general (i.e. I believe that sight gives me access to the world in way 'x' (assuming one is rational and not delusional etc.) - and that this same system of belief forming can thus be applied to what the author calls mystical perception (e.g. I perceive God, in so far as I am justified in believing that God has "directly" (p.286) appeared as a perceptual experience 'x' (p.70-1);* though indirect perception of God is mentioned as epistemically justifiable as well (p.288).

Since sensorial or sensory sight and mystical perception are both rational on these same exact logical grounds according to the theory, mystical perception can therefore be rational (regardless of whether or not there really is a God (this book does not cover that topic directly as it is about the nature of perceptual experience. "The aim is rather to rebut objections to the conviction of the subjects that they are directly aware of God, and to point out that if their conviction is correct they are also properly taken to be perceiving God" (p.5)).

The second point takes account of first hand experiences. Namely, it puts forward that there are certain 'checkers' which can be used to discern true - or likely to be true (i.e. justified) - actual mystical perceptions. These are: God as being "Good, powerful, plentiful, loving, compassionate, wise and glorious" (p.43) and doing the actions of "speaking, forgiving, strengthening, sympathising" (p.44). Concerning the intellect they should be about or involve "useful affairs and discretion", and regarding the will they should be "internally peaceful, trusting in God, patient in pains, simple and sincere and [involve] charity that is meek, kindly and self-forgetful" (p.203), and should be discerned from false and misleading ones; such as the intellect having or being "futile, useless, vain preoccupations, exaggerations and excessive", and of concerning the will as having "perturbation, disquiet, presumption or despair, impatience with trails, duplicity, dissimulation and false bitter pharisaical zeal" (p.203).

There is more to book than these two points I have chosen, such as the Christian background and the chapter on religious diversity, but these are the two I find specifically most important.

4/5 as the book is a bit long winded in places, though I understand the desire, in its place, to want to fully articulate and explain a position.

All errors in reconstructing the argumentation of the author, especially in regards to the first point in this review, are completely my own. Though I have attempted to provide the essence of the author's arguments, there may have been some nuances missed.

* Since "M[ystical]-beliefs are a particular species of perceptual beliefs…to the effect that God has some perceivable property or is engaging in some perceivable activity," (p.77) the argument therefore is: if we can justifiably be able to say that perception of God is possible, then those that meet the criteria for justifiable mystical belief can therefore be logically said to hold verifiable epistemic beliefs about God via perception.