Edgar Sheffield Brightman

What Constitutes a Scientific Interpretation of Religion

In the case of religion the very data to be observed and classified are experiences of persons. Hence valuations are inextricably intermingled with facts. It is the province of science to describe, but not to evaluate. Any science needs philosophy to complete the interpretation. Science is inevitably abstract; but it is unscientific to select one particular generalization as an all-inclusive principle of explanation. The science of religion is in danger of falling into methodological dogmatism through the exclusive use of a psychological method which is uncritically extended into metaphysics. Genuine science should be catholic, and pave the way for fruitful philosophical interpretation.

The More-Than-Human Values of Religion

Today civilization itself is in the melting-pot; nothing escapes, religion least of all. Yet underneath the current discontent with the forms, the beliefs, and the institutions of traditional religion, there is substantially universal agreement that there is something in religion that must survive. Human life needs religion, or an adequate moral equivalent for it. On another point, too, there is agreement: namely, that the historical religions, whether true or false, have contributed elements of profound value to the faithful. Religions which every modern man would regard as almost wholly made up of false beliefs have inspired and strengthened life, have made men happy, and have given them something to live for. Christian Science and Roman Catholicism can-