Reasoning About Religion

Trigg begins by discussing how social scientists study religion. Social scientis
ts do not want to deal with whether or not religious beliefs are true because th
ey believe such questions are in the realm of philosophy or theology, not scienc
e. Rather, what matters to these scientists is that such religious beliefs exist
and that they lead to certain religious rituals and practices. Another way of s
aying this is that social scientists deal not with the content of religious beli
efs, but with their contexts. Trigg believes that such an approach to studying r
eligion is bound to be incomplete: by failing to take religious beliefs seriousl
y, social scientists fail to take religion itself seriously. In particular, he s
ays that such an approach aims only to describe religions and not to explain the
m. This is a problem because many people would say that the job of science is no
t merely to describe the world, but also to put forth theories that can explain
it. Furthermore, Trigg sees no reason why we cannot investigate whether or not r
eligious beliefs are true. Sure, such an investigation may not be science (depen
ding on how one defines science), but so what? Lastly, Trigg notes that by ignor
ing the issue of whether religious beliefs are true, we forbid ourselves from sa
ying that certain religious beliefs are held because they are true.
===Explaining Religion===
Trigg observes that there seems to be a double standard among sociologists when
they evaluate religious and scientific beliefs. Sociologists have no problem say
ing that scientists believe in scientific theories because those theories are tr
ue. On the other hand, when explaining why religious people hold certain religio
us beliefs, sociologists tend to invoke social forces rather than admitting the
possibility that those beliefs are held simply because they are true. There seem
s to be an assumption that religious beliefs cannot be true, or that we cannot k
now whether or not religious beliefs are true. In this way, sociologists covertl
y elevate science above religion. This form of scientism is reminiscent of logic
al positivism, which holds that only statements that, in principle, can be empir
ically verified have any meaning. As such, it suffers from a similar problem as
logical positivism does: the principle that only empirically verifiable proposit
ions have any meaning is itself not empirically verifiable. In the same way, if
sociologists want to maintain that religious beliefs exist purely as a result of
social forces rather than because such beliefs are true, then it seems that the
same should be true about their sociological beliefs about religion that is, it s
eems that their views on religion should exist purely as a result of social forc
es and not because they are true.
Trigg also observes that sociological explanations for religious beliefs tend to
treat all religions the same. For example, one explanation for the persistence
of religion is that religions tend to promote social cohesiveness. Such explanat
ions ignore the fact that different religions have different beliefs.
Lastly, Trigg tries to give an explanation of why there are so many religions wi
th conflicting beliefs if they all are attempts at finding the truth. He says th
at perfectly rational people can come to different conclusions if they start wit
h different premises. Since we all start with incomplete information about the w
orld, it is not surprising that we come to different conclusions about the world
.
===The Autonomy of Religion===
A common assumption among anthropologists who study religion is that religious b
eliefs are not true but are a result of projections of human needs and aspiratio
ns. For Trigg, this raises the question of whether anthropological theories are
true or are just a result of projections of human needs and aspirations. Trigg r
eiterates that the assumption that religious beliefs are false and need explanat
ion itself needs explaining. He believes that social scientists should be open t
o the possibility that religious beliefs are true.