Religious Belief is Not Natural. Why Cognitive Science of Religion Does Not Show That Religious Belief is Trustworthy

1. Alston, William P. Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience. Cornell University Press: Ithaca (N.Y.), 1991.Search in Google Scholar

2. Barrett, Justin L. Why Would Anyone Believe in God? Altamira Press: Walnut Creek, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

3. Barrett, Justin L. Is the Spell Really Broken? Biopsychological Explanations of Religion and Theistic Belief. Theology and Science, 5, 2007, pp. 57-72.10.1080/14746700601159564Search in Google Scholar

4. Barrett, Justin L. Born Believers: The Science of Children's Religious Belief. Free Press: New York, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

5. Barrett, Justin L., Church, Ian M. Should CSR Give Atheists Epistemic Assurance? On Beergoggles, BFFs, and Skepticism Regarding Religious Belief. The Monist, 96, 2013, pp. 311-324.10.5840/monist201396314Search in Google Scholar

6. Bary, P. de. Thomas Reid and Scepticism. His Reliabilist Response. Routledge: London, 2002.Search in Google Scholar

7. Bering, J. The Existential Theory of Mind. Review of General Psychology, 6, 2002, pp. 3-24.10.1037/1089-2680.6.1.3Search in Google Scholar

8. Bering, J. The Belief Instinct: The Psychology of Souls, Destiny, and the Meaning of Life. Nicholas Brealey Publishing: London, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

9. Bering, J., Bjorklund, D. F. The Natural Emergence of Reasoning About the Afterlife as a Developmental Regularity. Developmental Psychology, 40, 2004, pp. 217-234.10.1037/0012-1649.40.2.21714979762Search in Google Scholar

10. Bering, J., Blasi, C. H., Bjorklund, D. F. The Development of ‘Afterlife’ Beliefs in Religiously and Secularly Schooled Children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23, 2005, pp. 587-607.10.1348/026151005X3649821214599Search in Google Scholar

11. Bloom, P. Religion is Natural. Developmental Science, 10, 2007, pp. 147-151.10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00577.x17181713Search in Google Scholar

12. Boyer, P. Religion Explained: The Human Instincts That Fashion Gods, Spirits and Ancestors. Vintage: London, 2002.Search in Google Scholar

13. Casler, K., Kelemen, D. Developmental Continuity in Teleo-Functional Explanation: Reasoning About Nature Among Romanian Romani Adults. Journal of Cognition and Development, 9, 2008, pp. 340-362.10.1080/15248370802248556Search in Google Scholar

14. Clark, K.J., Barrett, J.L. Reformed Epistemology and the Cognitive Science of Religion. Faith and Philosophy, 27, 2010.10.5840/faithphil201027216Search in Google Scholar

15. Clark, K.J., Barrett, J.L. Reidian Religious Epistemology and the Cognitive Science of Religion. Journal of the American academy of religion, 2011, pp. 1-37.Search in Google Scholar

16. Dawes, G.W., Jong, J. Defeating the Christian's Claim to Warrant. Philo, 15, 2013, pp. 127-44.10.5840/Philo20121527Search in Google Scholar

17. Dawes, G.W., Maclaurin, J. A New Science of Religion, Routledge: London, 2012.10.4324/9780203086131Search in Google Scholar

18. De Cruz, H., De Smedt, J. A Natural History of Natural Theology. The Cognitive Science of Theology and Philosophy of Religion. MIT Press: Cambridge (MA) London, 2015.10.7551/mitpress/10219.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

19. Foster, J. A. The Immaterial Self: A Defense of the Cartesian Dualist Conception of Mind. Routledge: London, 1991.Search in Google Scholar

20. Granqvist, P., Kirkpatrick, L. A. Attachment and religious representations and behavior. In. I. J. Cassidy, P. R. Shaver (eds.). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications. Guilford: New York, 2008, pp. 906-933.Search in Google Scholar

21. Granqvist, P., Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R. Religion as Attachment: Normative Processes and Individual Differences. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 2010, pp. 49-59.10.1177/1088868309348618Search in Google Scholar

22. Gray, K., Waytz, A., Young, L. The Moral Dyad: A Fundamental Template Unifying Moral Judgment. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 2012, pp. 206-215.10.1080/1047840X.2012.686247Search in Google Scholar

23. Gray, K., Wegner, D. M. Blaming God for Our Pain: Human Suffering and the Divine Mind. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 2010, pp. 7-16.10.1177/1088868309350299Search in Google Scholar

24. Horst, S. Notions of Intuition in Cognitive Science of Religion. The Monist, (3) 96, 2013, pp. 377-398.10.5840/monist201396317Search in Google Scholar

25. Hume, D. The Natural History of Religion. Clarendon: Oxford, 1976.Search in Google Scholar

26. Jong, J. How Not to Criticize the (Evolutionary) Cognitive Science of Religion. 2014. http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/criticize-evolutionary-cognitive-science_religion/ [09/07/2015].Search in Google Scholar

27. Jong, J., Kavanagh, Ch., Visala, A. Born idolaters: The limits of the philosophical implications of the cognitivescience of religion. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie, 57, 2015, pp. 244-66.10.1515/nzsth-2015-0012Search in Google Scholar

28. Kahneman, D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin: London, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

29. Kelemen, D. The Scope of Teleological Thinking in Preschool Children. Cognition, 70, 1999, pp. 241-272.10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00010-4Search in Google Scholar

30. Kelemen, D. Are Children “Intuitive Theists”?: Reasoning About Purpose and Design in Nature. Psychological Science, 15, 2004, pp. 295-301.10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00672.x15102137Search in Google Scholar

31. Kirkpatrick, L. A. Attachment, Evolution, and the Psychology of Religion. Guilford Press: New York, London, 2005.Search in Google Scholar

32. Marsh, J. Darwin and the Problem of Natural Nonbelief. The Monist, 96, 2013, pp. 349-376.10.5840/monist201396316Search in Google Scholar

33. McCauley, R. N. Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not. Oxford University Press, 2011.Search in Google Scholar

34. Murray, M., Goldberg, A. Evolutionary Accounts of Religion: Explaining and Explaining Away. In. J. Schloss, M. Murray (eds.). The Believing Primate. Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion. Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 179-199.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557028.003.0010Search in Google Scholar

35. Nola, R. Do Naturalistic Explanations of Religious Beliefs Debunk Religion? In. G. W. Dawes, J. Maclaurin (eds.). A New Science of Religion. Routledge: New York London, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

36. Norenzayan, A. Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict. Princeton University Press: Princeton New Jersey, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

37. Plantinga, A. Is Belief in God Properly Basic? Noûs, 15, 1981, pp. 41-51.10.2307/2215239Search in Google Scholar

38. Plantinga, A. Warrant and Proper Function. Oxford University Press: New York, 1993.10.1093/0195078640.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

39. Plantinga, A. Warranted Christian belief. Oxford University Press: New York, 2000.10.1093/0195131932.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

40. Schloss, J., Murray, M. J. The Believing Primate: Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion. Oxford University Press: New York, 2009.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557028.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

41. Shariff, A. F., Norenzayan, A. God Is Watching You: Priming God Concepts Increases Prosocial Behavior In an Anonymous Economic Game. Psychological Science, 18, 2007, pp. 803-809.10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01983.x17760777Search in Google Scholar

42. Swinburne, R. Substance Dualism. Faith and Philosophy, 26, 2009, pp. 501-513.10.5840/faithphil200926551Search in Google Scholar

43. Van Woudenberg, R. Perceptual Relativism, Scepticism, and Thomas Reid. Reid Studies, 3, 2000, pp. 65-90.Search in Google Scholar

44. Wilkins, J. S., Griffiths, P. E. Evolutionary Debunking Arguments in Three Domains. In. G. W. Dawes, J. Maclaurin (eds.). A New Science of Religion. Routledge: London, 2012.Search in Google Scholar