A Comparative Doxastic Practice Epistemology of Religious Experience

When someone claims to have experienced something, usually we are perfectly reasonable to take their word. In many cases, it would be unreasonable not to take their word. In the case of religious experience, it is not obvious that the same principles apply. This book makes the case that religious experience is relevantly like our other sources of belief that we are reasonable to rely on, so something like the ordinary principles do in fact apply, but that differences between religious doxastic practices make some practices more reasonable than others. In particular, beliefs based on Theravada Buddhist experiences are less subject to various defeating conditions, so it is more reasonable to accept Theravada Buddhist reports than Christian ones. The argument proceeds this way: After a preliminary discussion in which the problem is framed and various terminological matters are settled, some widespread challenges to the evidential value of religious experience are shown to be inade