William James and Psychology of Religion

James A. Van Slyke

William James (1842-1910)

Considered by many to be one of the top psychologists of all time Principles of Psychology (1890) Classic work in psychology

Prominent figure in psychology of religion His definition of religious experience is the starting

point for most studies in the field Not particular religious orientation, but recognized the

value of religion

Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) Pure Experience

Experiences were discreet episodes that needed to be analyzed as a whole

Introspection – personal examination of experience

Pluralistic Universe Religious experiences are not based on a

common element Experiences are diverse and disconnected

Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) Essence of religion is experience rather

than belief

Must investigate individual experiences to understand religion

Religion based on individual feeling (Schleiermacher) Passionate Emotional Energetic

Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) Institutional religion is less important than

individual experiences

Definition of religion: “the feelings, acts, and experiences of

individual [persons] in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider divine” (from Varieties)

Varieties contains a number of different accounts of religious experiences

Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) James struggled with depression for most

of his life Felt that a religious temperament may

help with psychological difficulties

Located persons on a continuum Healthy Minded Sick Souled

Religious experiences may help the sick souled

Helpful for dealing with psychological problems

Will to Believe (1897)

Three different Aspects of Religion

Alive – live options that must be dealt with

Forced – cannot be skeptical (example of a marriage proposal)

Momentous – something important to be gained

Will to Believe (1897) Differences in forms of Belief

Scientific – Rational May be amended with no real

bearing on my life Religious

Too important to wait before choosing

Seeks out what is good Any decision that is of utmost

importance requires an act of faith

Defining Religious Experience

Highly Diverse, Culturally Distinct

Difficult to Define

May be heightened emotional and unusual sensory experiences

Ordinary experiences interpreted through a religious framework Communion

Defining Religious Experience

Rodney Stark (1997) Confirming – Sensing the presence of the Divine

Silent time during a prayer Responsive – Experience of being helped in some

aspect of life Ecstatic – More intense feeling of connectedness with

the divine Glossolalia – speaking in tongues

Revelational – Receiving some sort of special knowledge from the divine Prophecy

Mysticism Non-conceptual knowledge of the divine

Characteristics in Varieties Ineffability – unable to give a verbal description of the

event “Beyond words”

Noetic Quality – Something life-changing has been learned

Transiency – experience lasts for a brief time Passivity – Feeling like the experience was out of one’s

control

Mysticism Unitive experience

A sense of union with God Usually a fundamental part of defining a religious

experience Perceiving a unity to God or the Supernatural Sense of participation in that unity

Paradoxical Beyond normal reason, cannot be described Yet, believed to be true Knowledge was gained, yet can’t describe what that

knowledge is

Christian Mysticism

Kataphatic tradition (Positive) Prayer that focuses on praising the many attributes of God

(love, grace, compassion, etc.)

Apophatic tradition (negative or lack of knowledge) Realization of our own ignorance before God Any positive statement cannot fully describe the divine

attributes

•Long history of mysticism in Christian theology

•Often occurred in smaller communities seeking solitude with God

Potential Problems How do you describe the indescribable?

Religious experiences cannot be completely ineffable Use language to describe them Use religious imagery and symbols

Translation Language differences between psychology and religion Can a nonreligious person understand a religious

experience? Can someone gain a first person perspective of

another?

Potential Problems Methodology

How reliable is introspection? Can the subjective be transferred into the objective? Limited to texts written by others and interviews

Was the experience a true experience of the divine?

Point of view Theoretical stance will change the way the data is

interpreted Is it possible to be ‘objective’ in regard to religion