Intersubjective verifiability

[s2a]

Intersubjective verifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How might this concept apply to religious beliefs or theological "logical explanations"?

You feedback is welcomed, albeit subject to reply.

Thank you

 

[Quintessence]

This buzzword is bandied about in the Neopagan community on occasion, amongst those who actually care about validating their personal experiences. I see it as just a fancy way of saying "since other people happen to agree with me, there's something to it." In truth, all human knowledge operates in this fashion, including scientifically-derived knowledge. It certainly has its uses, but I think it should be used with caution. It bothers me, for example, when some in my religious community get hung up on whether or not their experiences are "valid" instead of simply experiencing. They get caught up in analysis paralysis instead of breathing the richness of the event and deriving personal meaning from it that is valuable. Perhaps these same people have personality types that demand a "need to be right" or a "need to be an authority." In such cases, it would make sense for them to obsess on validity. I've found it derails and decays enjoyment and appreciation of arts, whether we're talking the mythological storytelling of religion or the painting of a landscape.

 

[s2a]

This buzzword is bandied about in the Neopagan community on occasion, amongst those who actually care about validating their personal experiences. I see it as just a fancy way of saying "since other people happen to agree with me, there's something to it." In truth, all human knowledge operates in this fashion, including scientifically-derived knowledge. It certainly has its uses, but I think it should be used with caution. It bothers me, for example, when some in my religious community get hung up on whether or not their experiences are "valid" instead of simply experiencing. They get caught up in analysis paralysis instead of breathing the richness of the event and deriving personal meaning from it that is valuable. Perhaps these same people have personality types that demand a "need to be right" or a "need to be an authority." In such cases, it would make sense for them to obsess on validity. I've found it derails and decays enjoyment and appreciation of arts, whether we're talking the mythological storytelling of religion or the painting of a landscape.

Um ok.

Not really an "answer" per se, but certainly a reply.

 

[idav]

If other people experience what I do then it must mean what we believe is true. Thats how science works too. With spirituality seems that the experiences are across all religions and cant be used to verify one sacred text over another.

 

[Quintessence]

Um ok.

Not really an "answer" per se, but certainly a reply.

I'm confused. How is it not an answer? Is it not what you wanted to hear or some such? You asked how the concept might apply to religious beliefs and I commented on how the idea applies to knowledge more broadly, and also how it sometimes operates in my own community. How is that not addressing what you asked? Did you mean to ask something else entirely?

 

[s2a]

I'm confused. How is it not an answer? Is it not what you wanted to hear or some such? You asked how the concept might apply to religious beliefs and I commented on how the idea applies to knowledge more broadly, and also how it sometimes operates in my own community. How is that not addressing what you asked? Did you mean to ask something else entirely?

My bad. Yes you did...sorta.

You did offer 1/2 "answer". (Of a sort).

Part 2 of the same inquiry pondered upon " theological "logical explanations" attributable to such beliefs...

..what you "explained, in essence" that some with "your community" are either self-centered, or have/retain unidentifiable "needs", that really do not address the "why" of any considered belief beyond, "I think it may be so, so it can/must be so."

I'm just saying that is not an answer, but it is an obtuse and unspecific response.
Is, "I don't know" that much of an odious possibility of expressed doubts?

Sometimes, perhaps, this may seem compelling to some,....but hardly enlightening or engaging for the rest of us to even begin to ponder upon.

Just as an annoying reminder..."Intersubjective verifiability"

- is the capacity of a concept to be readily and accurately communicated between different individuals ("intersubjectively"), and to be reproduced under varying circumstances for the purposes of verification. It is a core principle of empirical, scientific investigation.

Your abject dismissal re:: "since other people happen to agree with me, there's something to it."

...is not, ahem, a rationalization of a community behavior, not especially a revelation offered amongst those that may affiliate themselves as being "neo-pagan".

That's cool, just not especially revealing, or "logical". It is kinds "nice" tho....

 

[s2a]

If other people experience what I do then it must mean what we believe is true. Thats how science works too. With spirituality seems that the experiences are across all religions and cant be used to verify one sacred text over another.

Not really, no.

But it does remain a satisfying rationale amongst believers.

 

[idav]

Science calls it I peer review but is a bit different than verifying subjective experience. Just to clarify that part.