{"title":"群体认同与理性的故意颠覆:对德克鲁斯和列维的答复","authors":"Neil Van Leeuwen","doi":"10.1111/mila.12512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"De Cruz and Levy, in their commentaries on Religion as make‐believe, present distinct questions that can be addressed by clarifying one core idea. De Cruz asks whether one can rationally assess the mental state of religious credence that I theorize. Levy asks why we should not explain the data on religious “belief” merely by positing factual beliefs with religious contents, which happen to be rationally acquired through testimony. To both, I say that having religious credences is p‐irrational: a purposeful departure from rational thought and behavior, where the purpose in question is maintaining a group identity.","PeriodicalId":110770,"journal":{"name":"Mind & Language","volume":"8 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group identity and the willful subversion of rationality: A reply to De Cruz and Levy\",\"authors\":\"Neil Van Leeuwen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/mila.12512\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"De Cruz and Levy, in their commentaries on Religion as make‐believe, present distinct questions that can be addressed by clarifying one core idea. De Cruz asks whether one can rationally assess the mental state of religious credence that I theorize. Levy asks why we should not explain the data on religious “belief” merely by positing factual beliefs with religious contents, which happen to be rationally acquired through testimony. To both, I say that having religious credences is p‐irrational: a purposeful departure from rational thought and behavior, where the purpose in question is maintaining a group identity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":110770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mind & Language\",\"volume\":\"8 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mind & Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12512\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mind & Language","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12512","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
德克鲁兹和列维在对《作为虚构的宗教》(Religion as make-believe)的评论中提出了不同的问题,这些问题可以通过澄清一个核心观点来解决。德克鲁兹问人们能否理性地评估我理论中的宗教信仰心理状态。莱维则问,为什么我们不能仅仅通过假设具有宗教内容的事实信仰来解释宗教 "信仰 "的数据,而这些事实信仰恰好是通过证词理性地获得的。对于这两个问题,我的回答是,宗教信仰是一种 p-irrational 行为:一种有目的的偏离理性的思想和行为,其目的在于维护一种群体认同。
Group identity and the willful subversion of rationality: A reply to De Cruz and Levy
De Cruz and Levy, in their commentaries on Religion as make‐believe, present distinct questions that can be addressed by clarifying one core idea. De Cruz asks whether one can rationally assess the mental state of religious credence that I theorize. Levy asks why we should not explain the data on religious “belief” merely by positing factual beliefs with religious contents, which happen to be rationally acquired through testimony. To both, I say that having religious credences is p‐irrational: a purposeful departure from rational thought and behavior, where the purpose in question is maintaining a group identity.