The Rationality of Belonging: Cognitive Crises and Epistemic Clash within a Science and Religion Belief System.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Rationality of Belonging: Cognitive Crises and Epistemic Clash within a Science and Religion Belief System.
Authors: Cabral, Marcelo (AUTHOR)
Source: Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Mar2026, Vol. 61 Issue 1, p178-201. 24p.
Subjects: Social epistemology, Cognitive dissonance, Epistemics, Worldview, Philosophy of religion, Rationalism
Abstract: Doxastic conflicts are a pervasive feature of the modern human experience. We form beliefs on various interrelated subjects that, not rarely, conflict with each other. In this article, I argue that when an individual experiences a crisis between doxastic attitudes toward science and religion, there may be a deeper issue than just a disharmony among beliefs. There may be a higher-order clash between two distinct norms of rationality, which provides a robust account for why doxastic conflicts of this nature are widespread and challenging to resolve. I employ concepts from social epistemology to elucidate the nature of the epistemic clash and explore possible resolutions. First, I characterize a hypothetical conflict between an agent's scientific and religious beliefs. Second, I introduce three categories from contemporary debates in social epistemology: epistemic dependence, expertise, and epistemic community. Third, employing these categories, I characterize the high-order conflict an agent may experience between two distinct norms of rationality. Fourth, I describe four asymmetries between scientific and religious doxastic attitudes that bear importance to rationality. Fifth, from these asymmetries, I suggest a course of action an agent may take to mitigate their cognitive uneasiness and move towards a more integrated rational profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science is the property of Open Library of Humanities and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Description
Abstract:Doxastic conflicts are a pervasive feature of the modern human experience. We form beliefs on various interrelated subjects that, not rarely, conflict with each other. In this article, I argue that when an individual experiences a crisis between doxastic attitudes toward science and religion, there may be a deeper issue than just a disharmony among beliefs. There may be a higher-order clash between two distinct norms of rationality, which provides a robust account for why doxastic conflicts of this nature are widespread and challenging to resolve. I employ concepts from social epistemology to elucidate the nature of the epistemic clash and explore possible resolutions. First, I characterize a hypothetical conflict between an agent's scientific and religious beliefs. Second, I introduce three categories from contemporary debates in social epistemology: epistemic dependence, expertise, and epistemic community. Third, employing these categories, I characterize the high-order conflict an agent may experience between two distinct norms of rationality. Fourth, I describe four asymmetries between scientific and religious doxastic attitudes that bear importance to rationality. Fifth, from these asymmetries, I suggest a course of action an agent may take to mitigate their cognitive uneasiness and move towards a more integrated rational profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:05912385
DOI:10.16995/zygon.20050