PhilArchive
open access
In defense of religion
To defend religion is to invite confusion from every direction. To some, the term signals a retreat from reason, an apology for superstition, or a refusal to accept the hard-won insights of modern science. For others, defense suggests a rallying cry, an attempt to restore authority, reassert dogma, or protect inherited belief from scrutiny. I will do neither. I will not argue whether religious doctrines are true, miracles occurred, or sacred texts should govern public life. I will begin instead from a simpler observation. Religion is criticized for something it was never primarily meant to be.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Responsibility and False Beliefs#774602
- Christianity and fear#760440
- The Boundaries of Belief: Protecting the Vulnerable Over Religious Custom#313935
- Das große Missverständnis. Kierkegaard, das Christentum und die Mystik#764472
- Review of J.L. Schellenberg's Religion After Science#735248
Record · ID 99498
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive