Philosophy in Indic religions.

To speak of being religious lucky certainly sounds odd. But then, so does “My faith holds value in God’s plan, while yours does not.” This book argues that these two concerns — with the concept of religious luck and with asymmetric or sharply differential ascriptions of religious value — are inextricably connected. It argues that religious luck attributions can profitably be studied from a number of directions, not just theological, but also social scientific and philosophical. There is a strong tendency among adherents of different faith traditions to invoke asymmetric explanations of the religious value or salvific status of the home religion vis-à-vis all others. Attributions of good/bad religious luck and exclusivist dismissal of the significance of religious disagreement are the central phenomena that the book studies. Part I lays out a taxonomy of kinds of religious luck, a taxonomy that draws upon but extends work on moral and epistemic luck. It asks: What is going on when persons, theologies, or purported revelations ascribe various kinds of religiously-relevant traits to insiders and outsiders of a faith tradition in sharply asymmetric fashion? “I am saved but you are lost”; “My religion is holy but yours is idolatrous”; “My faith tradition is true, and valued by God, but yours is false and valueless.” Part II further develops the theory introduced in Part I, pushing forward both the descriptive/explanatory and normative sides of what the author terms his inductive risk account. Firstly, the concept of inductive risk is shown to contribute to the needed field of comparative fundamentalism by suggesting new psychological markers of fundamentalist orientation. The second side of what is termed an inductive risk account is concerned with the epistemology of religious belief, but more especially with an account of the limits of reasonable religious disagreement. Problems of inductively risky modes of belief-formation problematize claims to religion-specific knowledge. But the inductive risk account does not aim to set religion apart, or to challenge the reasonableness of religious belief tout court. Rather the burden of the argument is to challenge the reasonableness of attitudes of religious exclusivism, and to demotivate the “polemical apologetics” that exclusivists practice and hope to normalize.

Science has failed to develop ethical guidelines or a path to personal fulfillment as previously expected. Religious differences continue to be a source of friction, threatening world peace. But now a new, more encompassing vision of reality-a vision that offers new ways to address these problems-is emerging. This evolutionary view, presented by authors Joseph P. Provenzano and Richard W. Kropf, builds on the findings of modern science, but also touches on personal fulfillment and spiritual values. In our worldwide, computerized information age, we have seen an unprecedented clash of moral values, scientific pursuits, religions, spiritual movements, and cultures. Provenzano and Kropf explain how it is possible to have a religious faith consistent with the understanding of matter and energy as studied by contemporary science-logical faith. Logical Faith: Introducing a Scientific View of Spirituality and Religion presents a clear, down-to-earth formulation of an emerging vision. Provenzano and Kropf show how their viewpoint can be used as a bridge between science and spirituality and as a base to develop a new path to tolerance among the world's great religions and spiritual movements.

Fourteen original essays by philosophers, theologians, and social scientists explore the challenges to moral and religious belief posed by disagreement and evolution. The collection represents both sceptical and non-skeptical positions about morality and religion, cultivates new insights, and moves the discussion forward in illuminating ways.