this short article is approximately the overall concept. For other uses, see Belief (disambiguation).

Belief is the mindset we now have once we simply take one thing become the truth or consider it since the truth.[1]

In epistemology, philosophers make use of the term «belief» to reference personal attitudesassociated with true or false tips and principles. However, «belief» cannot need active introspection and circumspection. For example, we never ponder whether or not the sunlight will rise. We just assume the Sun will rise. Since «belief» is a significant aspect of mundane life, based on Eric Schwitzgebel in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, a related question asks: «how a physical system might have beliefs?»[2]

In the context of Ancient Greek thought, two relevant concepts were identified based on the notion of belief: pistis and doxa. Simplified, we may say that pistis describes «trust» and «confidence», while doxa describes «opinion» and «acceptance». The English term "orthodoxy" derives from doxa. Jonathan Leicester shows that belief has the purpose of guiding action in place of showing truth.[3]

As a psychological phenomenon

Mainstream therapy and related disciplines have usually addressed belief like it were the easiest type of psychological representation and for that reason one of many foundations of aware thought. Philosophers have tended to be more abstract inside their analysis, and far associated with the work examining the viability of belief concept is due to philosophical analysis.

The idea of belief presumes an interest (the believer) and an object of belief (the idea). Therefore, like other propositional attitudes, belief implies the existence of mental states and intentionality, both of which are hotly debated topics in philosophy of head, whose fundamentals and relation to mind states continue to be controversial.

Opinions are sometimes split into core philosophy (which are earnestly considered) and dispositional beliefs (which may be ascribed to anyone who has perhaps not seriously considered the issue). For example, if expected «do you think tigers wear pink pajamas?» a person might answer they do not, even though they may never have seriously considered this example before.[4]

This has important implications for comprehending the neuropsychology and neuroscience of belief. In the event that notion of belief is incoherent, then any try to get the underlying neural processes that help it will fail.

Philosopher Lynne Rudder Baker has outlined four main contemporary approaches to belief in her controversial guide preserving Belief:[5]

  • Our common-sense understanding of belief is proper – Sometimes called the «mental sentence theory,» in this conception, beliefs exist as coherent entities, together with means we mention them in everyday activity is a valid basis for scientific endeavour. Jerry Fodor is one of the major defenders of the point of view.
  • Our common-sense comprehension of belief might not be entirely proper, however it is close enough in order to make some helpful predictions – This view argues that people will in the course of time reject the notion of belief as we understand it now, but that there could be a correlation between what we try be a belief when someone claims «i really believe that snowfall is white» and exactly how another theory of therapy will explain this behaviour. Especially, philosopher Stephen Stich has argued with this particular comprehension of belief.
  • Our common-sense understanding of belief is totally wrong and will be totally superseded by a radically various concept that will have no use the idea of belief even as we know it – called eliminativism, this view (such as proposed by Paul and Patricia Churchland) contends your concept of belief is similar to obsolete theories of that time period past like the four humours concept of medication, and/or phlogiston theory of combustion. In such cases technology has not provided us with an even more step-by-step account of the theories, but totally rejected them as valid clinical principles become changed by totally different records. The Churchlands argue our common-sense notion of belief is similar because even as we learn more about neuroscience additionally the brain, the unavoidable conclusion will be to reject the belief hypothesis in its entirety.
  • Our common-sense comprehension of belief is completely incorrect; but treating individuals, pets, as well as computer systems just as if that they had beliefs is frequently an effective strategy – The major proponents with this view, Daniel Dennett and Lynne Rudder Baker, are both eliminativists in that they hold that beliefs are not a scientifically valid concept, but they don't go in terms of rejecting the concept of belief as a predictive device. Dennett provides exemplory case of playing a pc at chess. While few individuals would agree totally that the computer held values, treating the computer as though it did (age.g. that the computer thinks that using the opposition's queen gives it a substantial benefit) will be an effective and predictive strategy. Inside understanding of belief, called by Dennett the intentional stance, belief-based explanations of mind and behavior have reached a unique degree of description and therefore are maybe not reducible to those according to fundamental neuroscience, although both are explanatory at their very own degree.

Strategic approaches make a distinction between guidelines, norms and thinking the following:(1) Rules. Explicit regulative procedures like policies, laws and regulations, assessment routines, or incentives. Rules be a coercive regulator of behavior and tend to be influenced by the imposing entity's power to enforce them.(2) Norms. Regulative mechanisms accepted by the social collective. Norms are enforced by normative mechanisms in the company and therefore are perhaps not strictly influenced by legislation or legislation.(3) Beliefs. The collective perception of fundamental truths governing behavior. The adherence to accepted and shared beliefs by people of a social system will likely continue and start to become hard to change over time. Strong values about determinant factors (i.e., protection, survival, or honor) are likely to cause a social entity or group to accept rules and norms.[6]

Knowledge and epistemology

A Venn/Euler diagram which grants that truth and well-justified belief are distinguished and that their intersection is knowledge

Epistemology is concerned with delineating the boundary between justified belief and viewpoint,[7] and included generally with a theoretical philosophical study of knowledge. The main problem in epistemology is understand what is required to enable united states to possess knowledge. In a concept produced by Plato's discussion Theaetetus, in which the epistemology of Socrates (Platon) most obviously departs from that of the sophists, whom during the time of Plato seem to have defined knowledge as what's here expressed as "justified true belief". The propensity to translate from belief (here: doxa – typical opinion) to knowledge (right here: episteme), which Plato (age.g. Socrates associated with discussion) utterly dismisses, outcomes from failing woefully to differentiate a dispositive belief (gr. 'doxa', not 'pistis') from knowledge (episteme) once the opinion is looked upon real (right here: orthé), when it comes to right, and juristically so (in line with the premises of dialogue), that was the duty for the rhetors to show. Plato dismisses this likelihood of an affirmative relation between belief (i.e. viewpoint) and knowledge even though usually the one who opines grounds his belief on guideline, and is in a position to add reason (gr. logos: reasonable and always plausible assertions/evidence/guidance) to it.[8]

Plato was credited the "justified real belief" concept of knowledge, even though Plato in the Theaetetus (discussion) elegantly dismisses it, and also posits this argument of Socrates as a reason for his death penalty. Among American epistemologists, Gettier (1963)[9] and Goldman (1967),[10] have questioned the «justified real belief» meaning, and challenged the «sophists» of their hours.

Justified real belief

Justified real belief is a concept of knowledge that gained approval through the Enlightenment, 'justified' standing in comparison to 'revealed'. There were attempts to locate it back once again to Plato and their dialogues.[11] The thought of justified true belief states that so that you can realize that a given proposition holds true, one must not just believe the appropriate true proposition, but in addition have actually justification for doing so. Much more formal terms, a realtor S{displaystyle S}knows that a proposition P{displaystyle P}does work if and just if:

  1. P{displaystyle P}is true
  2. S{displaystyle S}believes that P{displaystyle P}is true, and
  3. S{displaystyle S}is justified in believing that P{displaystyle P}is true

This concept of knowledge experienced an important setback utilizing the development of Gettier problems, circumstances where above conditions had been seemingly met but that many philosophers disagree that any such thing is well known.[12]Robert Nozick recommended a clarification of «justification» which he thought removes the issue: the justification has to be so that were the reason false, the information could be false. Bernecker and Dretske (2000) argue that «no epistemologist since Gettier has really and effectively defended the traditional view.»[13]:3 However, Paul Boghossian argues your Justified True Belief account may be the «standard, widely accepted» definition of knowledge.[14]


Our company is influenced by numerous facets that ripple through our minds as our thinking form, evolve, and may even sooner or later change

Psychologists learn belief formation therefore the relationship between thinking and actions. Three models of belief formation and alter have been proposed:

The conditional inference process

When people are expected to estimate the chance that a declaration does work, they search their memory for information who has implications the legitimacy of this declaration. Once these records has been identified, they estimate a) the likelihood your declaration could be true if the information had been real, and b) the reality that the statement is true if the information were false. If their quotes of these two probabilities vary, people normal them, weighting each by the chance your information is real and false (respectively). Thus, information bears on values of some other, related declaration.[15]

Linear models of belief formation

Unlike the last model, this one takes under consideration the likelihood of numerous factors influencing belief development. Utilizing regression procedures, this model predicts belief formation based on several different bits of information, with weights assigned every single piece on such basis as their relative importance.[15]

Information processing types of belief formation and change

These models address the fact the responses individuals have to belief-relevant information is not likely become predicted through the objective basis of the information that they can recall at that time their thinking are reported. Rather, these reactions reflect the amount and meaning associated with the thoughts that individuals have towards message at the time that they encounter it.[15]

Some influences on people's belief formation include:

  • Internalization of values during childhood, which could form and shape our philosophy in numerous domain names. Albert Einstein can be quoted as with that said «Common feeling is the collection of prejudices obtained by age eighteen.» Governmental opinions rely most strongly on the governmental opinions most common in the community where we reside.[16] Many individuals believe the faith they certainly were taught in childhood.[17]
  • Charismatic leaders can form and/or alter values (even when those opinions fly in the face of all previous values).[18] Is belief voluntary? Rational people need certainly to reconcile their direct reality with any said belief; for that reason, if belief is not present or possible, it reflects the fact contradictions were necessarily overcome making use of intellectual dissonance.
  • Advertising could form or change thinking through repetition, shock, and association with images of sex, love, beauty, alongside strong good thoughts.[19] Unlike instinct, a delay, known as the sleeper impact, rather than instant succession may increase an advertisement's capability to persuade audience's values if a discounting cue is present.[20]
  • Physical trauma, especially toward mind, can radically change your beliefs.[21]

However, even educated individuals, well aware of the method where opinions form, still strongly cling to their opinions, and act on those philosophy also against unique self-interest. In Anna Rowley's book, Leadership Therapy, she states «You want your philosophy to alter. It is proof that you are keeping your eyes available, living fully, and inviting whatever the entire world and folks around you'll coach you on.» This means that individuals' values should evolve as they gain brand new experiences.[22]

Belief revision

See also: Belief revision

An substantial quantity of clinical research and philosophical discussion exists across the modification of beliefs, which will be commonly called belief revision.Generally speaking, the entire process of belief revision requires the believer weighing the set of truths and/or proof, plus the dominance of a set of truths or evidence on an alternative to a held belief can lead to revision. One procedure of belief revision is Bayesian upgrading and is frequently referenced because of its mathematical basis and conceptual simplicity. But such an activity might not be representative for folks whose opinions are not easily characterized as probabilistic.

There are several techniques for individuals or teams to improve the beliefs of others; these procedures generally speaking fall under the umbrella of persuasion. Persuasion takes in more particular forms particularly consciousness raising whenever considered in an activist or governmental context.Belief modification might also occur as a result of the knowledge of results. Because goals are based, partly on thinking, the success or failure at a specific goal may contribute to modification of thinking that supported the original goal.

If belief modification in fact occurs depends not just on the degree of truths or proof the alternative belief, but additionally traits away from certain truths or evidence. This consists of, it is not limited to: the source faculties associated with message, like credibility; social pressures; the expected consequences of an adjustment; and/or ability for the individual or team to act in the modification. Therefore, individuals wanting to achieve belief modification in by themselves or other people must give consideration to all feasible forms of opposition to belief revision.


Without certification, «belief» ordinarily implies a lack of doubt, specially insofar since it is a designation of a life stance. In practical every day usage but belief is usually partial and retractable with varying quantities of certainty.

A copious literature exists in numerous procedures to accommodate this reality. In mathematics probability, fuzzy logic, fuzzy set theory, as well as other topics are mostly directed to this.


Different psychological models have tried to predict individuals thinking and some of these make an effort to estimate the actual probabilities of philosophy. Including, Robert Wyer developed a model of subjective probabilities.[23][24] When individuals price the chances of a particular statement (e.g., «It will rain tomorrow»), this score can be seen as a subjective likelihood value. The subjective likelihood model posits that these subjective probabilities proceed with the exact same guidelines as objective probabilities. For example, what the law states of total likelihood may be put on anticipate a subjective probability value. Wyer found that this model produces fairly accurate predictions for probabilities of single activities as well as for alterations in these probabilities, but your probabilities of a few opinions linked by «and» or «or» usually do not follow the model too.[23][24]

Epistemological belief in comparison to religious belief

Historically belief-in belonged in the world of religious idea, belief-that instead belonged to epistemological factors.[25]


To «believe in» some one or something like that is a definite concept from «believing-that.» You can find at the least these belief-in:[26]

  • Commendatory / Faith – we may make a manifestation of 'faith' in respect of some performance by a representative X, whenever without prejudice towards the truth value associated with the factual outcome as well as self-confidence in X otherwise, we anticipate that particular performance. Specifically self-confidence or faith in one single's self is this type of belief.
  • Existential claim – to claim belief in the existence of an entity or sensation in an over-all means aided by the suggested should justify its claim of existence. It is often used if the entity just isn't genuine, or its existence is in doubt. «He believes in witches and ghosts» or «many young ones rely on Santa Claus» or «I believe in a deity» are typical examples.[27] The linguistic kind is distinct from assertion associated with truth of a proposition since verification is either considered impossible/irrelevant or a counterfactual situation is assumed.


Economic belief

Further information: Economic ideology

Economic philosophy are thinking that are fairly and fundamentally despite the tenet of logical option or instrumental rationality.[28]

Studies of Austrian tradition associated with the financial idea, inside context of analysis of the impact and subsequent amount of modification caused by existing financial knowledge and belief, has added the most to your subsequent holistic collective analysis.[29]


Insofar since the truth of belief is expressed in sentential and propositional kind we have been utilizing the sense of belief-that as opposed to belief-in. Delusion arises whenever truth value associated with the form is actually nil.[30][31][32]

Delusions are defined as thinking in psychiatric diagnostic criteria[33] (like inside Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of psychological Disorders). Psychiatrist and historian G.E. Berrios has challenged the view that delusions are genuine values and instead labels them as «empty message acts,» in which affected persons are inspired to express false or strange belief statements considering an underlying mental disruption. But the majority of mental health specialists and researchers treat delusions like they were genuine thinking.

In Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass the White Queen claims, «Why, often I've believed as numerous as six impossible things before breakfast.» This is quoted in mockery associated with the typical ability of men and women to entertain opinions contrary to reality.

Religious belief

Religious belief relates to attitudes towards mythological, supernatural, or religious aspects of a faith.[34] Religious belief is distinct from religious practice and from religious behaviours – with believers maybe not practicing faith plus some professionals not believing religion. Spiritual values, deriving from a few ideas being exclusive to religion, frequently relate to the existence, faculties and worship of a deity or deities, towards the notion of divine intervention in universe plus in peoples life, or even to the deontological explanations the values and methods predicated on the teachings of a spiritual frontrunner or of a spiritual team. In contrast to other belief systems, religious beliefs are codified.[35]


a well known view holds that various religions each have actually recognizable and exclusive sets of philosophy or creeds, but surveys of religious belief have actually often unearthed that the state doctrine and descriptions for the philosophy offered by religious authorities don't always buy into the independently held philosophy of those whom identify as users of a certain religion.[36] For an extensive classification of the types of spiritual belief, see below.


Main article: spiritual fundamentalism

First self-applied as a term towards conservative doctrine outlined by anti-modernist Protestants in the United States,[37] «fundamentalism» in spiritual terms denotes strict adherence to an interpretation of scriptures which can be generally connected with theologically conservative roles or old-fashioned understandings associated with the text and generally are distrustful of innovative readings, brand new revelation, or alternative interpretations. Spiritual fundamentalism is identified in news to be related to fanatical or zealous governmental motions worldwide that have used a strict adherence to a certain spiritual doctrine as a way to determine governmental identity and also to enforce societal norms.


Main article: Orthodoxy

First found in the context of Early Christianity, the term «orthodoxy» pertains to spiritual belief that closely follows the edicts, apologies, and hermeneutics of a prevailing spiritual authority. Regarding Early Christianity, this authority was the communion of bishops, and is frequently described by the term "Magisterium". The definition of orthodox had been applied nearly as an epithet to several Jewish believers whom held to pre-Enlightenment knowledge of Judaism – now called Orthodox Judaism. The Eastern Orthodox Church of Christianity as well as the Catholic Church each start thinking about themselves become the genuine heir to Early Christian belief and practice. The antonym of «orthodox» is "heterodox", and people staying with orthodoxy frequently accuse the heterodox of apostasy, schism, or heresy.


The Renaissance and later the Enlightenment in Europe exhibited varying degrees of spiritual tolerance and intolerance towards brand new and old spiritual ideas. The philosophes took specific exception to numerous of this more fantastical claims of religions and straight challenged religious authority and also the prevailing values associated with the established churches. In reaction to the liberalizing governmental and social movements, some religious teams attempted to incorporate Enlightenment ideals of rationality, equality, and individual freedom into their belief systems, especially into the nineteenth and 20th hundreds of years. Reform Judaism and Liberal Christianity provide two types of such religious associations.


Some believe that faith can not be separated from other facets of life, or believe particular cultures failed to or do not split their spiritual tasks off their tasks just as that some individuals in modern Western cultures do.

Some anthropologists report countries where gods get excited about all facets of life – if a cow goes dry, a god has caused this, and should be propitiated; if the sunlight rises in the morning, a god has caused this, and must certanly be thanked. Even yet in modern Western countries, people see supernatural forces behind every occasion, as described by Carl Sagan in their 1995 book The Demon-Haunted World.

People who have such a worldview often consider the impact of Western tradition as inimical. Others using this worldview resist the impact of science, and believe science (or «so-called science») ought to be guided by religion. Nevertheless others with this particular worldview genuinely believe that all governmental choices and laws is directed by religion. This last belief, written in to the constitutions of manyIslamic countries, is shared by some fundamentalist Christians.

Additionally, philosophy towards supernatural or metaphysical cannot presuppose a difference between such a thing as nature and non-nature, nor between technology and just what most educated individuals think. In view of some historians, the pre-Socratic Athenians saw science, political tradition, culture and religion as perhaps not effortlessly distinguishable, but as all part of the exact same body of real information and wisdom available to a community.

Methods to the values of others

Adherents of specific religions deal with the differing doctrines and methods espoused by other religions or by other religious denominations in many ways.


See additionally: Religious exclusivism

People with exclusivist thinking typically explain other thinking either as in mistake, or as corruptions or counterfeits for the real faith. This approach is a reasonably consistent feature among smaller brand new religious motions very often depend on doctrine that claims an original revelation by the founders or leaders, and considers it a matter of faith your «correct» faith has a monopoly on truth. All three major Abrahamic monotheistic religions have actually passages in their holy scriptures that attest to the primacy associated with the scriptural testimony, and indeed monotheism it self is generally vouched as an innovation characterized specifically by its explicit rejection of early in the day polytheistic faiths.

Some exclusivist faiths include a particular part of proselytization. This is a strongly-held belief into the Christian tradition which follows the doctrine associated with Great Commission, and it is less emphasized by the Islamic faith where in fact the Quranic edict «There will probably be no compulsion in religion» (2:256) can be quoted as a justification for toleration of alternative values. The Jewish tradition will not earnestly seek out converts.

Exclusivism correlates with conservative, fundamentalist, and orthodox approaches of numerous religions, while pluralistic and syncretist approaches either explicitly downplay or reject the exclusivist tendencies within a religion.


People with inclusivist philosophy recognize some truth in most faith systems, highlighting agreements and minimizing distinctions. This mindset can be related to Interfaith dialogue or with all the Christian Ecumenical movement, though in principle such efforts at pluralism aren't necessarily inclusivist and several actors in such interactions (like, the Roman Catholic Church) still hold to exclusivist dogma while playing inter-religious companies.

Clearly inclusivist religions consist of numerous which can be from the modern age movement, including contemporary reinterpretations of Hinduism and Buddhism. The Bahá'í Faith considers it doctrine there is truth in every faith-systems.


Main article: Religious pluralism

People with pluralist values make no distinction between faith systems, viewing every one as legitimate within a specific tradition. For example:

  • Extracts from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji (Sikh Holy Scriptures), «There is just usually the one Supreme Lord Jesus; there's absolutely no other at all» (Pannaa 45). «By their energy the Vedas as well as the Puranas exist, and Holy Scriptures of Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions. By His energy all deliberations exist.» (Pannaa 464). «Some call Him, 'Ram, Ram', and some call Him, 'Khudaa-i'. Some provide Him as 'Gusain', others as 'Allaah'. ||1|| he could be the explanation for factors, the Generous Lord. He showers their Grace and Mercy upon united states amen.» (Pannaa 885).


Main article: Syncretism

People with syncretistic views blend the views of many different various religions or conventional philosophy into a unique fusion which matches their experiences and contexts (see eclecticism). Unitarian Universalism exemplifies a syncretistic faith.


See additionally: Existence of God

Typical good reasons for adherence to faith include the following:

  • Some see belief in a deity as essential for moral behavior.[38]
  • Many individuals regard spiritual practices as serene, beautiful, and conducive to religious experiences, which help religious thinking.[39]
  • Organized religions promote a feeling of community among all of their followers, and ethical and cultural typical ground among these communities means they are appealing to people with comparable values.[40] Indeed, while religious thinking and techniques are usually connected, some individuals with significantly secular thinking nevertheless be involved in spiritual practices for cultural reasons.[41]
  • Each religion asserts it is a way through which its adherents may come into closer experience of the Divine, with Truth, along with spiritual energy. All of them vow to free adherents from religious bondage, and to bring them into spiritual freedom. It naturally follows that a religion which could free its adherents from deception, sin, and spiritual death need significant mental-health benefits. Abraham Maslow's research after World War II revealed that Holocaust survivors tended to be people who held strong spiritual values (certainly not temple attendance, etc.), suggesting that belief helped people cope in extreme circumstances. Humanistic therapy went on to research exactly how religious or spiritual identification could have correlations with longer lifespan and better wellness. The study discovered that humans may particularly need religious suggestions to provide various emotional needs such as the should feel liked, the requirement to are part of homogeneous teams, the need for understandable explanations together with dependence on a guarantee of ultimate justice. Other factors may involve feeling of function, sense of identification, or a sense of connection with the divine. See also guy's look for Meaning, by Viktor Frankl, detailing his experience with the need for faith in surviving the Holocaust. Experts assert your really undeniable fact that religion ended up being the primary selector for research subjects may have introduced a bias, and that the fact that all subjects had been Holocaust survivors may also have experienced a result. Based on Larson et al. (2000), "[m]ore longitudinal research with better multidimensional measures can help further simplify the functions of these [religious] factors and whether or not they are extremely advantageous or harmful."[42]

Psychologist James Alcock also summarizes a number of apparent advantages which reinforce spiritual belief. Included in these are prayer appearing to account for successful quality of problems, «a bulwark against existential anxiety and fear of annihilation,» an elevated feeling of control, companionship with your deity, a source of self-significance, and team identity.[43]


Main article: ApostasySee additionally: presence of God § Arguments against belief in God

Typical reasons behind getting rejected of faith include:

  • Some individuals consider certain fundamental doctrines of some religions as illogical, despite experience, or unsupported by adequate proof; such people may reject a number of religions for the people reasons.[44] Also some believers could have difficulty accepting particular spiritual assertions or doctrines. Many people believe the body of proof open to people to be insufficient to justify specific spiritual beliefs. They may hence disagree with religious interpretations of ethics and individual purpose, or with different creation fables. This reason has maybe been annoyed by the protestations and empases of some fundamentalist Christians.
  • Some religions consist of thinking that particular categories of people are inferior or sinful and deserve contempt, persecution, and/or death, which non-believers will be punished for his or her unbelief in an after-life.[45] Adherents to a religion may feel antipathy to unbelievers. Numerous examples occur of individuals of 1 religion or sect utilizing religion as a reason to murder individuals with various spiritual values. To say just a few examples:
    • the slaughter of the Huguenots by French Catholics in the sixteenth century
    • Hindus and Muslims killing each other when Pakistan separated from India in 1947
    • the persecution and killing of Shiite Muslims by Sunni Muslims in Iraq
    • the murder of Protestants by Catholics and vice versa in Ireland (both of these examples in late 20th century)
    • the Israeli–Palestinian conflict that continues by 2018 – in accordance with some experts of faith, such beliefs can encourage totally unnecessary disputes and perhaps also wars. Numerous atheists genuinely believe that, because of this, faith is incompatible with globe comfort, freedom, civil rights, equality, and good government. Having said that, many religions perceive atheism as a threat and will vigorously and even violently defend on their own against spiritual sterilization, making the attempt to remove general public religious practices a source of strife.[46]
  • Some individuals are not able to accept the values that a certain faith encourages and can for that reason maybe not join that religion. They may additionally be struggling to accept the idea that people that do not think will go to hell or be damned, especially if stated nonbelievers are close to the person.
  • The upkeep of life therefore the success of self-esteem need of you the fullest workout of reason—but morality (folks are taught) rests on and requires faith.[47]

Belief systems

See additionally: Ideology

A belief system is a set of mutually supportive opinions. The thinking of any such system is classified as religious, philosophical, political, ideological, or a mixture of these. Philosopher Jonathan Glover states that opinions are often part of a belief system, which tenanted belief systems are problematic for the tenants to totally revise or reject.[48][49]


A collective belief is known when individuals talk about just what «we» believe when it is not just elliptical for just what «we all» believe.[50]

Sociologist Émile Durkheim published of collective values and proposed which they, as with any "social facts", «inhered in» social teams rather than specific persons. Durkheim's discussion of collective belief, though suggestive, is reasonably obscure.[51]

Philosopher Margaret Gilbert (1942- ) has offered an associated account in terms of the joint commitment of numerous individuals to just accept a particular belief as a human body. In accordance with this account, individuals who together collectively believe something do not need to really believe it by themselves. Gilbert's work on the subject has stimulated a developing literary works among philosophers. One question who has arisen is whether and how philosophical accounts of belief in general have to be responsive to the possibility of collective belief.

Philosopher Jonathan Glover warns that belief systems are like entire boats in the water; it is very tough to change them all at the same time (as an example, it may possibly be too stressful, or individuals may keep their biases without realizing it).[48]

Jonathan Glover (1941- ) thinks that he along with other philosophers ought to play some part in starting dialogues between people with deeply-held, opposing values, especially if there is threat of physical violence. Glover additionally believes that philosophy will offer insights about values that would be strongly related such dialogue.

Glover implies that opinions need to be considered holistically, which no belief exists in isolation inside brain of believer. Each belief always implicates and relates to other beliefs.[48] Glover provides the exemplory instance of someone with a sickness whom returns to a health care provider, however the physician says that the prescribed medicine isn't working. At that point, the in-patient has a lot of freedom in selecting exactly what values to help keep or reject: the individual could think that a doctor is incompetent, your physician's assistants made a blunder, your person's own body is exclusive in certain unexpected method, that Western medicine is ineffective, and on occasion even that Western science is entirely not able to find out truths about disorders.[48]

Glover keeps that any person can still hold any belief when they wants to[48] (like, with help from ad hoc hypotheses). One belief is held fixed, and other beliefs is going to be changed around it. Glover warns that some thinking may possibly not be completely clearly thought (for instance, some individuals may not understand they've racist belief-systems used from their environment as a young child). Glover believes that individuals tend to very first recognize that values can transform, and may also be contingent on the upbringing, around age 12 or 15.[48]

Glover emphasizes that philosophy are hard to alter. He says that you can you will need to reconstruct an individual's thinking on safer fundamentals (axioms), like building a fresh house, but warns that might not be possible. Glover offers the exemplory case of René Descartes, saying: "[Descartes] starts off with the characteristic thinking of a 17th-century Frenchman; then he junks the great deal, he rebuilds the device, and somehow it appears a lot like the beliefs of a 17th-century Frenchman." To Glover, belief systems aren't like houses but are rather like boats. As Glover sets it: «Maybe the whole lot requires rebuilding, but inevitably at any point you must keep enough of it intact to help keep drifting.»[48]

Glover's last message is that if people discuss their beliefs, they may find more deep, appropriate, philosophical ways in which they disagree (age.g., less apparent philosophy, or more-deeply-held thinking). Glover believes that folks often have the ability to find agreements and opinion through philosophy. He claims that at the least, if people don't transform one another, they'll hold their very own philosophy more openmindedly and will be less likely to want to head to war over conflicting opinions.[48][52]

The British philosopher Stephen Law (1960-) has described some belief systems (including belief in homeopathy, psychic abilities, and alien abduction) as "claptrap" and stated that such belief-systems can «draw individuals in and hold them captive so that they become willing slaves of claptrap [...] if you have sucked in, it could be excessively hard to think the right path clear again».[53]

See also

  • Alief
  • Collective behavior
  • Culture-specific syndrome
  • Doxastic attitudes
  • Doxastic logic
  • Expectation (epistemic)
  • Folk psychology
  • Idea
  • Moore's paradox
  • Nocebo
  • Observer-expectancy effect
  • Opinion
  • Placebo
  • Propositional knowledge
  • Psychosomatic illness
  • Self-deception
  • Spell (paranormal)
  • Spirituality
  • Subject-expectancy effect
  • Subjective validation
  • Sugar pill
  • Suggestibility
  • Suggestion
  • Theory of justification
  • Thomas theorem
  • Trust
  • Unintended consequence
  • Validity
  • Value (personal and cultural)
  • World view


  1. ^ Primmer, Justin (2018), «Belief», in Primmer, Justin (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford, CA: The Metaphysics analysis Lab, retrieved 19 September 2008
  2. ^ Compare: [1] – «The 'mind-body problem', as an example, therefore main to philosophy of brain, is simply issue of whether and exactly how a purely physical system might have beliefs.» Retrieved 01 July 2016.
  3. ^ Primmer, Justin (2018). «The nature and reason for belief». Journal of Mind and Behavior. 29 (3): 219–239. Retrieved 3 June 2018. The goal of belief should guide action, to not suggest truth.
  4. ^ Bell, V.; Halligan, P.W.; Ellis, H.D. (2006). «A Intellectual Neuroscience of Belief». In Halligan, Peter W.; Aylward, Mansel (eds.). The effectiveness of Belief: emotional Influence on disease, impairment, and Medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-853010-7.
  5. ^ Baker, Lynne Rudder (1989). Preserving Belief: A Critique of Physicalism. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-07320-0.
  6. ^ Chairman of this Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S. Army (2012). Information Operations. Joint Publication 3–13. Joint Doctrine Support Division, Suffolk, VA. p. 22.
  7. ^ Oxford Dictionaries – definition published by OUP [Retrieved 2015-08-09]
  8. ^ – 2007, 2008 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D.
  9. ^ Gettier, E.L. (1963). «Is justified real belief knowledge?». Analysis. 23 (6): 121–123. doi:10.1093/analys/23.6.121. JSTOR 3326922.
  10. ^ Goldman, A.I. (1967). «A causal theory of knowing». The Journal of Philosophy. 64 (12): 357–372. doi:10.2307/2024268. JSTOR 2024268.
  11. ^ The received view holds it that Plato's concept gift suggestions knowledge as remembering eternal truths and justification reawakens memory, see Fine, G. (2003). «Introduction». Plato on Knowledge and Forms: Selected Essays. Ny: Oxford University Press. pp. 5–7. ISBN 978-0-19-924558-1.
  12. ^ Chisholm, Roderick (1982). «Knowledge as Justified True Belief». The Fundamentals of Knowing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-0-8166-1103-4.
  13. ^ Bernecker, Sven; Dretske, Fred (2000). Knowledge. Readings in modern epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-19-875261-5.
  14. ^ Paul Boghossian (2007), Fear of Knowledge: Against relativism and constructivism, Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, ISBN 978-0-19-923041-9, Chapter 2, p. 15.
  15. ^ a b c Wyer, R.S., & Albarracin, D. (2005). Belief development, organization, and change: Cognitive and motivational influences. In D. Albarracin, B.T. Johnson, & M.P. Zanna, The Handbook of Attitudes (273–322). New Yor: Psychology Press.
  16. ^ Gelman, Andrew; Park, David; Shor, Boris; Bafumi, Joseph; Cortina, Jeronimo (2008). Red State, Blue State, Deep State, Bad State: Why People In America Vote the direction they Do. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13927-2.
  17. ^ Argyle, Michael (1997). The Psychology of Religious Behaviour, Belief and Experience. London: Routledge. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-415-12330-3. Religion, generally in most countries, is ascribed, maybe not selected.
  18. ^ Hoffer, Eric (2002). The Genuine Believer. Nyc: Harper Perennial Contemporary Classics. ISBN 978-0-06-050591-2.
  19. ^ Kilbourne, Jane; Pipher, Mary (2000). Can't Buy The Love: How Advertising Changes just how We Think and Feel. Complimentary Press. ISBN 978-0-684-86600-0.
  20. ^ see Kumkale & Albarracin, 2004
  21. ^ Rothschild, Babette (2000). Your body Remembers: The Psychophysiology of Trauma and Trauma Treatment. Nyc: W.W. Norton & Business. ISBN 978-0-393-70327-6.
  22. ^ Rowley, Anna (2007). Leadership Treatment: In The Mind of Microsoft. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 69. ISBN 978-1-4039-8403-6.
  23. ^ a b Wyer, R.S. (1970). «Quantitative prediction of belief and viewpoint change: A further test of a subjective likelihood model». Journal of Personality and Personal Psychology. 16 (4): 559–570. doi:10.1037/h0030064.
  24. ^ a b Wyer, R.S.; Goldberg, L. (1970). «A probabilistic analysis regarding the relationships among values and attitudes». Emotional Review. 77 (2): 100–120. doi:10.1037/h0028769.
  25. ^ Cost, H.H. (1965). «Belief 'In' and Belief 'That'». Religious Studies. 1 (1): 5–27. doi:10.1017/S0034412500002304.
  26. ^ MacIntosh, J.J. (1994). «Belief-in Revisited: An Answer to Williams». Spiritual Studies. 30 (4): 487–503. doi:10.1017/S0034412500023131.
  27. ^ Macintosh, Jack. «Belief-in». The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. p. 86. ISBN 978-0-19-926479-7.
  28. ^ Peter Taylor-Gooby – Economic Beliefs and personal Policy Behaviour Economic and Social analysis Council (Economic Beliefs and behaviour research programme) [Retrieved 2015-08-09]
  29. ^ R. Arena & A. Festré (1 January 2006). Knowledge, Beliefs and Economics. Edward Elgar Publishing 2006, 288 pages. ISBN 978-1-84720-153-9. Retrieved 9 August 2015.
  30. ^ L. Bortolotti (2010). Delusions and Other Irrational Beliefs. OUP Oxford 2010, 299 pages, Global Perspectives in Philosophy & Psychiatry. ISBN 978-0-19-920616-2.
  31. ^ Tarski's Truth Definitions, LOTH Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  32. ^ Introduction to Logic also to the Methodology regarding the Deductive Sciences" Alfred Tarski Dover 1995/41, Ch. I, § 2 Expressions containing variables—sentential and designatory functionsand Ch. II regarding the Sentential Calculusin its entirety
  33. ^ Delusions inside DSM 5 A blog by Lisa Bortolotti & Ema Sullivan-Bissett
  34. ^ Unknown. «exactly what does religious belief mean?». Retrieved 24 February 2019.
  35. ^ Wittgenstein, Ludwig (2007). Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief. University of Ca Press. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-520-25181-6.
  36. ^ Braithwaite, R.B. (1975). An empiricist's view associated with the nature of spiritual belief. Norwood Editions (Norwood, Pa.). ISBN 978-0-88305-955-5.
  37. ^ «The basics: A Testimony to the Truth». 27 November 2012. Archived through the initial on 3 December 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.
  38. ^ Compare: «Roy Moore: 'We Have No Morality Without an Acknowledgment of Jesus'». Christianity Today. 7 March 2005. Retrieved 19 May 2006.
  39. ^ Miller, David Ian (15 February 2005). «Finding My Religion: Steve Georgiou on his faith and mentor, minimalist poet Robert Lax». SFGate. Retrieved 19 Might 2006.
  40. ^ Repa, J. Theodore (18 October 1998). «Building Community: The Marriage of Religion and Education». Archived from the original on 7 September 2006. Retrieved 19 May 2006.
  41. ^ Note for example the idea of a cultural Christian.
  42. ^ Larson, David B.; Susan S. Larson; Harold G. Koenig (October 2000). «Research Findings on Religious Commitment and Mental Health». Psychiatric Times. 17 (10). Retrieved 19 Might 2006.
  43. ^ Alcock, James (2018). «The God Engine». Skeptical Inquirer. 42 (5): 32–38.
  44. ^ For instance: Russell, Bertrand (1927). «Why I am Not a Christian». Archived from the original on 19 November 2006. Retrieved 19 Might 2006.
  45. ^ Like, some Muslims believe that women can be inferior to males. Some Christians share this belief. At the time of the American Civil War of 1861–1865, numerous Southerners used passages from Bible to justify race-based slavery. Specific campaigners used the Christian faith as reasons to persecute and also to deny the rights of homosexuals, in the basis that the Christian biblical Jesus disapproves of homosexuality, by implication of homosexuals. Compare
  46. ^ Beauchamp, Philip (pseudonym of Jeremy Bentham) review for the impact of normal Religion in the Temporal joy of Mankind, 1822, R. Carlile, London, at web page 76: «Of all human antipathies, what the believer in a God bears on unbeliever could be the fullest, probably the most unqualified, additionally the most universal»
  47. ^ Faith could be the commitment of the awareness to beliefs that one has no sensory proof or rational evidence. When a person rejects explanation as their standard of judgment, only one alternative standard presumably continues to be to them: feelings. A mystic is an individual who treats feelings as tools of cognition. Faith may be the equation of feeling with knowledge. To practice the «virtue» of faith, one must (we are told) be prepared to suspend your sight and something's judgment; one must be ready to live with the unintelligible, with that which can't be conceptualized or integrated into the rest of one's knowledge, and to cause a trance like impression of understanding. One must allegedly be willing to repress your critical faculty and hold it as one's shame; one needs to be willing to drown any questions that increase in protest—to strangle any trust of reason convulsively seeking to assert its appropriate function as the protector of the life and intellectual integrity. The presumed human requirement for self-esteem involves the need for a feeling of control of reality—but no control is achievable in a universe which, by an individual's own concession, offers the supernatural, the miraculous plus the causeless, a universe by which one is at the mercy of ghosts and demons, which one must deal, maybe not using the unknown, however with the unknowable; no control is possible if a person proposes, but a ghost disposes; no control is possible in the event that world is a haunted household. Someone's life and self-esteem need your item and concern of his or her awareness be truth which earth—but morality, individuals are taught, comprises of scorning this earth together with world available to sensory perception, and of considering, alternatively, a «different» and «higher» reality, a realm inaccessible to explanation and incommunicable in language, but attainable by revelation, by unique dialectical processes, by that superior state of intellectual lucidity proven to Zen-Buddhists as «No-Mind,» or by death. An individual's life and self-esteem need that this individual take pride inside their power to think, pride inside their capacity to live—but morality, people are taught, holds pride, and specifically intellectual pride, while the gravest of sins. Virtue starts, individuals are taught, with humility: with all the recognition of the helplessness, the smallness, the impotence of one's brain. An individual's life and self-esteem purportedly need anyone to be faithful with their values, dedicated for their brain and its judgments, devoted to their life—but the essence of morality, individuals are taught, consist of self-sacrifice: the sacrifice of the brain to some greater authority, and sacrifice of the values to whoever may claim to require it. A sacrifice, it is important to consider, means the surrender of an increased value and only a reduced value or of a nonvalue. If one offers up what one doesn't value to be able to get what one does value—or if one gives up an inferior value to get a greater one—this is not a sacrifice, but an increase. Remember further that of your values presumably exist in a hierarchy; people appreciate several things over other people; and, to the degree that one is logical, the hierarchical purchase of the individual's values is rational: which, anyone values things compared with their value in serving this person's life and well-being. That which is inimical for their life and well-being, whatever is inimical with their nature and requirements as an income being, anyone disvalues. Conversely, one of many characteristics of mental infection is a distorted value framework; the neurotic will not value things based on their objective merit, in terms of the individual's nature and requirements; they generally appreciate the things that will lead them to self-destruction. Judged by objective requirements, they have been engaged in a chronic process of self-sacrifice. However, if sacrifice is a virtue, it is not the neurotic nevertheless the logical one who needs to be “cured”. They must learn how to do physical violence with their very own logical judgment—to reverse your order of their value hierarchy—to surrender that which their head has chosen due to the fact good—to change against and invalidate their own awareness.Waldau, Paul (2001). The Specter of Speciesism: Buddhist and Christian Views of pets (United states Academy of Religion publications). Oxford University Press, US. ISBN 978-0-19-514571-7.
  48. ^ a b c d e f g h «Jonathan Glover on systems of belief», Philosophy Bites Podcast, Oct 9 2011
  49. ^ Elizabeth A. Minton, Lynn R. Khale (2014). Belief Techniques, Religion, and Behavioral Economics. Nyc: Company Expert Press LLC. ISBN 978-1-60649-704-3.
  50. ^ Dancy, Jonathan (2016) [2014]. A Companion to Epistemology. Just the Facts101 (2 ed.). Content Technologies Inc. ISBN 9781478400028. Retrieved 30 April 2019. A collective belief is described whenever people discuss about it what 'we' think when this isn't merely elliptical for just what 'everyone' believe.
  51. ^ Dancy, Jonathan (2016) [2014]. A Companion to Epistemology. Just the Facts101 (2 ed.). Information Technologies Inc. ISBN 9781478400028. Retrieved 30 April 2019. Sociologist Émile Durkheim wrote of collective thinking and proposed that they, as with any 'social facts', 'inhered in' social teams as opposed to individual individuals. Durkheim's discussion of collective belief, though suggestive, is relatively obscure.
  52. ^ 'Philosophy, Beliefs, and Conflict',
  53. ^ New Scientist (magazine), 11 June 2011 A field guide to bullshit | Brand new Scientist — «Intellectual black colored holes are belief systems that draw individuals in and hold them captive so they become ready slaves of claptrap. Belief in homeopathy, psychic powers, alien abductions – they are types of intellectual black holes. While you approach them, you need to be alert because if you have sucked in, it can be incredibly hard to think your path clear once more.»

Further reading

  • Robert Audi. «Dispositional Beliefs and Dispositions to Believe», Noûs, Vol. 28, number 4 (Dec., 1994), pp. 419–434.OCLC 481484099
  • Coleman III, T., Jong, J., & van Mulukom, V. (2018). Introduction towards Special problem: exactly what are spiritual opinions?. modern Pragmatism, 15(3), 279–283. doi:10.1163/18758185-01503001
  • Elisa Järnefelt, Created by Some Being: Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of Adults' automated and Reflective Beliefs about the Origin of Natural Phenomena. Diss. University of Helsinki, 2013.ISBN 978-952-10-9416-3.
  • Fred Leavitt, «Dancing with Absurdity: Your Many Cherished Beliefs (and All Your Others) are Probably incorrect. Peter Lang, 2015.
  • J. Leicester, „exactly what values are made from“. Sharjah, UAE: Bentham Science Publishers, 2016.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has news linked to Belief.Wikiquote has quotations pertaining to: BeliefWikiversity has learning resources about focusing on how You KnowWikiversity has learning resources about Seeking True Beliefs
  • The dictionary concept of belief at Wiktionary
  • The dictionary concept of belief system at Wiktionary
  • Schwitzgebel, Eric. »Belief". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • «The Aim of Belief». Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Links to relevant articles
  • v
  • t
  • e
  • Thomas Aquinas
  • Augustine of Hippo
  • William Alston
  • Robert Audi
  • A. J. Ayer
  • George Berkeley
  • Laurence BonJour
  • René Descartes
  • John Dewey
  • Fred Dretske
  • Edmund Gettier
  • Alvin Goldman
  • Nelson Goodman
  • Paul Grice
  • David Hume
  • Immanuel Kant
  • Søren Kierkegaard
  • Saul Kripke
  • David Lewis
  • John Locke
  • G. E. Moore
  • Robert Nozick
  • Alvin Plantinga
  • Plato
  • Duncan Pritchard
  • Hilary Putnam
  • Thomas Reid
  • Gilbert Ryle
  • Susanna Siegel
  • Ernest Sosa
  • P. F. Strawson
  • Willard Van Orman Quine
  • Bertrand Russell
  • Baruch Spinoza
  • Timothy Williamson
  • Ludwig Wittgenstein
  • Nicholas Wolterstorff
  • Vienna Circle
  • Coherentism
  • Constructivist epistemology
  • Contextualism
  • Descriptive knowledge
  • Determinism
  • Empiricism
  • Evolutionary epistemology
  • Fallibilism
  • Feminist epistemology
  • Fideism
  • Foundationalism
  • Genetic epistemology
  • Hierarchical epistemology
  • Holism
  • Infinitism
  • Innatism
  • Internalism and externalism
  • Naïve realism
  • Naturalized epistemology
  • Phenomenalism
  • Positivism
  • Procedural knowledge
  • Reductionism
  • Reliabilism
  • Representative realism
  • Rationalism
  • Skepticism
  • Theory of forms
  • Transcendental idealism
  • Uniformitarianism
  • A priori knowledge
  • Analysis
  • Analytic–synthetic distinction
  • Belief
  • Causality
  • Common sense
  • Exploratory thought
  • Gettier problem
  • Justification
  • Knowledge
  • Induction
  • Objectivity
  • Privileged access
  • Problem of induction
  • Problem of other minds
  • Perception
  • Proposition
  • Regress argument
  • Simplicity
  • Speculative reason
  • Truth
  • more...
Related articles
  • Outline of epistemology
  • Alethiology
  • Faith and rationality
  • Formal epistemology
  • Meta-epistemology
  • Philosophy of perception
  • Philosophy of science
  • Social epistemology
  • Portal
  • Category
  • Task Force
  • Stubs
  • Discussion
  • v
  • t
  • e
  • Metaphysics
    • Ontology
  • Epistemology
  • Logic
  • Ethics
  • Aesthetics
Philosophy of
  • Action
  • Art
    • Culture
    • Design
    • Music
    • Film
  • Business
  • Color
  • Cosmos
  • Dialogue
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Futility
  • Happiness
  • Healthcare
  • History
  • Human nature
  • Humor
  • Feminism
  • Language
  • Life
  • Literature
  • Mathematics
  • Mind
    • Pain
    • Psychology
  • Philosophy of psychiatry
  • Philosophy of perception
  • Philosophy
  • Religion
  • Science
    • Physics
    • Chemistry
    • Biology
    • Geography
  • Sexuality
  • Social science
    • Culture
    • Economics
    • Justice
    • Law
    • Politics
    • Society
  • Space and time
  • Sport
  • Technology
    • Artificial intelligence
    • Computer science
    • Engineering
    • Information
  • War
Schools of thoughtBy era
  • Ancient
  • Western
    • Medieval
    • Renaissance
    • Early modern
    • Modern
    • Contemporary
  • Agriculturalism
  • Confucianism
  • Legalism
  • Logicians
  • Mohism
  • Chinese naturalism
  • Neotaoism
  • Taoism
  • Yangism
  • Zen
  • Aristotelianism
  • Atomism
  • Cynicism
  • Cyrenaics
  • Eleatics
  • Eretrian school
  • Epicureanism
  • Hermeneutics
  • Ionian
    • Ephesian
    • Milesian
  • Megarian school
  • Neoplatonism
  • Peripatetic
  • Platonism
  • Pluralism
  • Presocratic
  • Pyrrhonism
  • Pythagoreanism
  • Neopythagoreanism
  • Sophistic
  • Stoicism
  • Hindu
  • Samkhya
  • Nyaya
  • Vaisheshika
  • Yoga
  • Mīmāṃsā
  • Ājīvika
  • Ajñana
  • Cārvāka
  • Jain
    • Anekantavada
    • Syādvāda
  • Buddhist
    • Śūnyatā
    • Madhyamaka
    • Yogacara
    • Sautrāntika
    • Svatantrika
  • Mazdakism
  • Zoroastrianism
  • Zurvanism
  • Christian
  • Scholasticism
  • Thomism
  • Renaissance humanism
East Asian
  • Korean Confucianism
  • Edo neo-Confucianism
  • Neo-Confucianism
  • Vedanta
    • Acintya bheda abheda
    • Advaita
    • Bhedabheda
    • Dvaita
    • Nimbarka Sampradaya
    • Shuddhadvaita
    • Vishishtadvaita
  • Navya-Nyāya
  • Averroism
  • Avicennism
  • Illuminationism
  • ʿIlm al-Kalām
  • Sufi
  • Judeo-Islamic
  • Cartesianism
  • Kantianism
  • Neo-Kantianism
  • Hegelianism
  • Marxism
  • Spinozism
  • Anarchism
  • Classical Realism
  • Liberalism
  • Collectivism
  • Conservatism
  • Determinism
  • Dualism
  • Empiricism
  • Existentialism
  • Foundationalism
  • Historicism
  • Holism
  • Humanism
    • Anti-
  • Idealism
    • Absolute
    • British
    • German
    • Objective
    • Subjective
    • Transcendental
  • Individualism
  • Kokugaku
  • Materialism
  • Modernism
  • Monism
  • Naturalism
  • Natural law
  • Nihilism
  • New Confucianism
  • Neo-scholasticism
  • Pragmatism
  • Phenomenology
  • Positivism
  • Reductionism
  • Rationalism
  • Social contract
  • Socialism
  • Transcendentalism
  • Utilitarianism
  • Applied ethics
  • Analytic feminism
  • Analytical Marxism
  • Communitarianism
  • Consequentialism
  • Critical rationalism
  • Experimental philosophy
  • Falsificationism
  • Foundationalism / Coherentism
  • Generative linguistics
  • Internalism and Externalism
  • Logical positivism
  • Legal positivism
  • Normative ethics
  • Meta-ethics
  • Moral realism
  • Quinean naturalism
  • Ordinary language philosophy
  • Postanalytic philosophy
  • Quietism
  • Rawlsian
  • Reformed epistemology
  • Systemics
  • Scientism
  • Scientific realism
  • Scientific skepticism
  • Transactionalism
  • Contemporary utilitarianism
  • Vienna Circle
  • Wittgensteinian
  • Critical theory
  • Deconstruction
  • Existentialism
  • Feminist
  • Frankfurt School
  • New Historicism
  • Hermeneutics
  • Neo-Marxism
  • Phenomenology
  • Posthumanism
  • Postmodernism
  • Post-structuralism
  • Social constructionism
  • Structuralism
  • Western Marxism
  • Kyoto School
  • Objectivism
  • Postcritique
  • Russian cosmism
  • more...
  • Formalism
  • Institutionalism
  • Aesthetic response
  • Consequentialism
  • Deontology
  • Virtue
Free will
  • Compatibilism
  • Determinism
    • Hard
  • Incompatibilism
    • Hard
  • Libertarianism
  • Atomism
  • Dualism
  • Monism
  • Naturalism
  • Constructivism
  • Empiricism
  • Idealism
  • Particularism
  • Fideism
  • Rationalism / Reasonism
  • Skepticism
  • Solipsism
  • Behaviorism
  • Emergentism
  • Eliminativism
  • Epiphenomenalism
  • Functionalism
  • Objectivism
  • Subjectivism
  • Absolutism
  • Particularism
  • Relativism
  • Nihilism
  • Skepticism
  • Universalism
  • Action
  • Event
  • Process
  • Anti-realism
  • Conceptualism
  • Idealism
  • Materialism
  • Naturalism
  • Nominalism
  • Physicalism
  • Realism
  • By region
  • Related lists
  • Miscellaneous
By region
  • African
  • Ethiopian
  • Amerindian
  • Aztec
  • Eastern
  • Chinese
  • Egyptian
  • Indian
  • Indonesian
  • Iranian
  • Japanese
  • Korean
  • Pakistani
  • Vietnamese
  • Western
  • American
  • Australian
  • British
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • French
  • German
  • Greek
  • Italian
  • Polish
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Slovene
  • Spanish
  • Turkish
  • Outline
  • Index
  • Years
  • Problems
  • Schools
  • Glossary
  • Philosophers
  • Movements
  • Publications
  • Natural law
  • Women in philosophy
  • Sage (philosophy)
  • Portal
  • Category
  • Book
  • v
  • t
  • e
Philosophical logicCritical thinking and
informal logic
  • Analysis
  • Ambiguity
  • Argument
  • Belief
  • Bias
  • Credibility
  • Evidence
  • Explanation
  • Explanatory power
  • Fact
  • Fallacy
  • Inquiry
  • Opinion
  • Parsimony (Occam's razor)
  • Premise
  • Propaganda
  • Prudence
  • Reasoning
  • Relevance
  • Rhetoric
  • Rigor
  • Vagueness
Theories of deduction
  • Constructivism
  • Dialetheism
  • Fictionalism
  • Finitism
  • Formalism
  • Intuitionism
  • Logical atomism
  • Logicism
  • Nominalism
  • Platonic realism
  • Pragmatism
  • Realism
  • v
  • t
  • e
ReligionMajor spiritual groups and denominations1AbrahamicJudaism
  • Orthodox
    • Haredi
    • Hasidic
    • Modern
  • Conservative
  • Reform
  • Karaite
  • Samaritanism
  • Haymanot
  • Reconstructionist
  • Renewal
  • Humanistic
  • Catholicism
    • Latin Church
    • Eastern Catholicism
  • Eastern Orthodoxy
  • Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Nestorianism
    • Assyrian Church of this East
    • Ancient Church of East
  • Protestantism
    • Waldensianism
    • Hussitism
      • Moravian Church
    • Lutheranism
    • Calvinism/Presbyterianism
    • Anabaptism
      • Amish
      • Hutterites
      • Mennonites
    • Anglicanism
    • Methodism
    • Plymouth Brethren
    • Baptists
    • Quakerism
    • Restorationism
    • Adventism
    • Holiness movement
    • Pentecostalism (Charismatic)
  • Independent Catholicism
  • Nontrinitarianism
    • Unitarianism
    • Swedenborgianism
    • Mormonism
    • Christadelphians
    • Bible Students
    • Jehovah's Witnesses
    • Oneness Pentecostalism
  • Spiritual
  • Esoteric
  • Nondenominational
    • Evangelicalism
  • Sunni
    • Ashʿari
    • Maturidi
    • Traditionalist theology
    • Salafism
      • Wahhabism
      • Modernist Salafism
  • Shia
    • Twelver
    • Zaidiyyah
    • Isma'ilism
    • Alawis
  • Sufism
  • Khawarij
    • Ibadi
  • Alevism
  • Ahmadi
  • Mahdavia
  • Quranism
  • Non-denominational
  • Bábism
    • Azali
    • Bahá'í
  • Druze
  • Ali-Illahism
  • Yarsanism
  • Mandaeism
  • Rastafarianism
  • Vaishnavism
    • Sri Vaishnavism
    • Brahma Sampradaya
    • Nimbarka Sampradaya
    • Pushtimarg
    • Mahanubhava
    • Ramanandi
    • Varkari
  • Shaivism
    • Siddhantism
    • Kashmir Shaivism
    • Kapalika
    • Kaumaram
    • Lingayatism
    • Nath
    • Balinese
  • Shaktism
  • Smartism
  • Śrauta
  • Sant Mat
  • Ayyavazhi
  • Neo-Hinduism
  • Theravada
  • Mahayana
    • Chan/Zen
    • Amidism
    • Nichiren
  • Vajrayana
    • Tibetan
  • Neo-Buddhism
  • Jainism
    • Digambara
    • Śvētāmbara
  • Sikhism
  • Kalash
  • Zoroastrianism
  • Yazidis
  • Ossetian
  • Armenian
  • Baltic
  • Celtic
    • Druidry
  • Germanic
  • Hellenism
  • Italo-Roman
  • Romanian
  • Slavic
  • Estonian
  • Finnish
  • Hungarian
  • Mari
  • Mordvin
  • Sámi
  • Udmurt
  • Turkic-Mongolic
    • Tengrism
    • Burkhanism
    • Vattisen Yaly
  • Tungusic
    • Manchu
    • Evenki
  • Nivkh
  • Confucianism
  • Taoism
    • Folk Taoism
    • Yao Taoism
  • Nuo
  • Salvationist
    • Xiantiandao
    • Yiguandao
  • Luoism
  • Bon
  • Burmese
  • Benzhuism
  • Bimoism
  • Bathouism
  • Bongthingism
  • Donyi-Polo
  • Kiratism
  • Qiang
  • Sanamahism
  • Sindoism
  • Cheondoism
  • Jeungsanism
  • Shinto
  • Tenrikyo
  • Ryukyuan
  • Ahom
  • Mo
  • Satsana Phi
  • Vietnamese
    • Caodaism
    • Đạo Mẫu
    • Hoahaoism
  • Sarnaism
  • Batak Parmalim
  • Dayak
    • Kaharingan
    • Momolianism
  • Javanese Kejawèn
  • Karo Pemena
  • Malaysian
  • Philippine Dayawism
    • Tagalog
  • Polynesian
    • Hawaiian
    • Māori
  • Sumbese Marapu
  • Sundanese Wiwitan
  • Akan
  • Akamba
  • Baluba
  • Bantu
    • Kongo
    • Zulu
  • Berber
    • Guanche church
  • Bushongo
  • Dinka
  • Efik
  • Fon and Ewe
  • Igbo
  • Ik
  • Lotuko
  • Lozi
  • Lugbara
  • Maasai
  • Mbuti
  • San
  • Serer
  • Tumbuka
  • Urhobo
  • Waaq
  • Yoruba
    • Ifá
  • Candomblé
    • Bantu
    • Jejé
    • Ketu
  • Comfa
  • Convince
  • Espiritismo
  • Kumina
  • Obeah
  • Palo
  • Quimbanda
  • Santería
  • Tambor de Mina
  • Trinidad Orisha
  • Umbanda
  • Vodou
  • Voodoo
  • Winti
  • Abenaki
  • Anishinaabe
  • Blackfoot
  • Californian
    • Miwok
    • Ohlone
    • Pomo
  • Cherokee
  • Chilote
  • Choctaw
  • Creek
  • Guarani
  • Haida
  • Ho-Chunk
  • Hopi
  • Iroquois
    • Seneca
    • Wyandot
    • Longhouse Religion
  • Jivaroan
  • Kwakwakaʼwakw
  • Lakota
  • Lenape
  • Mapuche
  • Mesoamerican
    • Aztec
    • Maya
    • Purépecha
  • Midewiwin
  • Muisca
  • Native American Church
  • Navajo
  • Nuu-chah-nulth
  • Pawnee
  • Tsimshian
  • Ute
  • Zuni
Other groups
  • Aboriginal Australian
  • Circassian
  • Dravidian
  • Hmongism
  • Inuit
  • Papuan
  • Anthroposophy
  • Brahmoism
  • Discordianism
  • Eckankar
  • Falun Gong
  • Fourth Way
  • Goddess movement
  • Japanese
  • Jediism
  • Modekngei
  • Neopaganism
    • Reconstructionism
    • Wicca
  • Neoshamanism
  • New Acropolis
  • New Age
  • New Thought
  • Rajneesh
  • Satanism
  • Spiritism
  • Subud
  • Tensegrity
  • Thelema
  • Theosophy
    • Neo-Theosophy
    • Agni Yoga
  • Transcendental Meditation
  • UFO religion
    • Raëlism
    • Scientology
  • Unitarian Universalism
  • White Brotherhood
Note: 1 the key supply: Eliade, Mircea, ed. (1987). The Encyclopedia of Religion. 16 vols. Ny: MacMillan.Historical religions
  • Prehistoric
    • Paleolithic
  • Harappan
  • Egyptian
    • Atenism
  • Mesopotamian
    • Sumerian
  • Semitic
    • Canaanite
    • Yahwism
  • Arabian
  • Somali
  • Hurrian
  • Urartu
  • Etruscan
  • Basque
  • Georgian
  • Vainakh
  • Proto-Indo-European
  • Proto-Indo-Iranian
  • Vedic
  • Mazdaism
  • Hittite
  • Armenian
  • Albanian
  • Thracian
  • Greek
    • Mysteries
    • Orphism
    • Gnosticism
    • Hermeticism
    • Greco-Buddhism
  • Roman
    • Imperial cult
    • Gallo-Roman
    • Mithraism
  • Manichaeism
    • Mazdakism
  • Scythian
  • Germanic
    • Anglo-Saxon
    • Continental
    • Frankish
    • Norse
  • Celtic
  • Baltic
  • Slavic
  • Finnish
  • Hungarian
  • Ainu
  • Melanesian
  • Micronesian
    • Nauruan
  • Cook Islands
  • Rapa Nui
  • Tongan
  • Inca
  • Olmec
  • Zapotec
  • Fuegian
    • Selk'nam
  • Guanche
  • Swahili
  • Jamaican Maroon
  • Apostasy / Disaffiliation
  • Behaviour
  • Beliefs
  • Clergy
  • Conversion
  • Deities
  • Entheogens
  • Ethnic religion
  • Denomination
  • Faith
  • Fire
  • Folk religion
  • God
  • Meditation
  • Monasticism
    • monk
    • nun
  • Mysticism
  • Mythology
  • Nature
  • Ordination
  • Orthodoxy
  • Orthopraxy
  • Prayer
  • Prophecy
  • Religious experience
  • Ritual
    • liturgy
    • sacrifice
  • Spirituality
  • Supernatural
  • Symbols
  • Truth
  • Water
  • Worship
  • Animism
  • Deism
  • Dualism
  • Henotheism
  • Monotheism
  • Nontheism
  • Panentheism
  • Pantheism
  • Polytheism
  • Transtheism
  • Anthropology
  • Cognitive science
  • Comparative
  • Development
  • Evolutionary origin
  • Evolutionary psychology
  • History
  • Philosophy
  • Neurotheology
  • Psychology
  • Sociology
  • Theology
  • Theories
  • Women
Religion and
  • Agriculture
  • Business
  • Clergy
    • monasticism
    • ordination
  • Conversion
    • evangelism
    • missionary
    • proselytism
  • Disability
  • Education
  • Fanaticism
  • Freedom
    • pluralism
    • syncretism
    • toleration
    • universalism
  • Fundamentalism
  • Growth
  • Happiness
  • Homosexuality
  • Minorities
  • National church
  • National religiosity levels
  • Religiocentrism
  • Political science
  • Populations
  • Schism
  • Science
  • State
  • Theocracy
  • Vegetarianism
  • Video games
  • Violence
    • persecution
    • terrorism
    • war
  • Wealth
Secularism and
  • Antireligion
  • Deism
  • Agnosticism
  • Atheism
  • Criticism
  • LaVeyan Satanism
  • Deconstruction
  • Humanistic Judaism
  • Irreligion by country
  • Objectivism
  • Secular humanism
  • Secular theology
  • Secularization
  • Separation of church and state
  • Unaffiliated
and lists
  • Index
  • Outline
  • Timeline
  • Abrahamic prophets
  • Deification
  • Deities
  • Founders
  • Mass gatherings
  • New spiritual movements
  • Organizations
  • Religions and religious traditions
  • Scholars
  • Category
  • Portal
  • v
  • t
  • e
Philosophy of religionConcepts in religion
  • Afterlife
  • Euthyphro dilemma
  • Faith
  • Intelligent design
  • Miracle
  • Problem of evil
  • Religious belief
  • Soul
  • Spirit
  • Theodicy
  • Theological veto
Conceptions of God
  • Aristotelian view
  • Brahman
  • Demiurge
  • Divine simplicity
  • Egoism
  • Holy Spirit
  • Misotheism
  • Pandeism
  • Personal god
  • Process theology
  • Supreme Being
  • Unmoved mover
God in
  • Abrahamic religions
  • Buddhism
  • Christianity
  • Hinduism
  • Islam
  • Jainism
  • Judaism
  • Mormonism
  • Sikhism
  • Bahá'í Faith
  • Wicca
Existence of GodFor
  • Beauty
  • Christological
  • Consciousness
  • Cosmological
    • Kalam
    • Contingency
  • Degree
  • Desire
  • Experience
  • Fine-tuning of the Universe
  • Love
  • Miracles
  • Morality
  • Necessary existent
  • Ontological
  • Pascal's Wager
  • Proper basis
  • Reason
  • Teleological
    • Natural law
    • Watchmaker analogy
  • Transcendental
  • 747 gambit
  • Atheist's Wager
  • Evil
  • Free will
  • Hell
  • Inconsistent revelations
  • Nonbelief
  • Noncognitivism
  • Occam's razor
  • Omnipotence
  • Poor design
  • Russell's teapot
  • Acosmism
  • Agnosticism
  • Animism
  • Antireligion
  • Atheism
  • Creationism
  • Dharmism
  • Deism
  • Demonology
  • Divine command theory
  • Dualism
  • Esotericism
  • Exclusivism
  • Existentialism
    • Christian
    • Agnostic
    • Atheistic
  • Feminist theology
    • Thealogy
    • Womanist theology
  • Fideism
  • Fundamentalism
  • Gnosticism
  • Henotheism
  • Humanism
    • Religious
    • Secular
    • Christian
  • Inclusivism
  • Theories about religions
  • Monism
  • Monotheism
  • Mysticism
  • Naturalism
    • Metaphysical
    • Religious
    • Humanistic
  • New Age
  • Nondualism
  • Nontheism
  • Pandeism
  • Panentheism
  • Pantheism
  • Perennialism
  • Polytheism
  • Possibilianism
  • Process theology
  • Religious skepticism
  • Spiritualism
  • Shamanism
  • Taoic
  • Theism
  • Transcendentalism
  • more...
Religious language
  • Eschatological verification
  • Language game
  • Logical positivism
  • Apophatic theology
  • Verificationism
Problem of evil
  • Augustinian theodicy
  • Best of feasible worlds
  • Euthyphro dilemma
  • Inconsistent triad
  • Irenaean theodicy
  • Natural evil
  • Theodicy
of religion
(by date active)Ancient and
  • Anselm of Canterbury
  • Augustine of Hippo
  • Avicenna
  • Averroes
  • Boethius
  • Erasmus
  • Gaunilo of Marmoutiers
  • Pico della Mirandola
  • Heraclitus
  • King James VI and I
  • Marcion of Sinope
  • Thomas Aquinas
  • Maimonides
Early modern
  • Augustin Calmet
  • René Descartes
  • Blaise Pascal
  • Baruch Spinoza
  • Nicolas Malebranche
  • Gottfried W Leibniz
  • William Wollaston
  • Thomas Chubb
  • David Hume
  • Baron d'Holbach
  • Immanuel Kant
  • Johann G Herder
  • Friedrich Schleiermacher
  • Karl C F Krause
  • Georg W F Hegel
  • William Whewell
  • Ludwig Feuerbach
  • Søren Kierkegaard
  • Karl Marx
  • Albrecht Ritschl
  • Afrikan Spir
  • Ernst Haeckel
  • W K Clifford
  • Friedrich Nietzsche
  • Harald Høffding
  • William James
  • Vladimir Solovyov
  • Ernst Troeltsch
  • Rudolf Otto
  • Lev Shestov
  • Sergei Bulgakov
  • Pavel Florensky
  • Ernst Cassirer
  • Joseph Maréchal
  • George Santayana
  • Bertrand Russell
  • Martin Buber
  • René Guénon
  • Paul Tillich
  • Karl Barth
  • Emil Brunner
  • Rudolf Bultmann
  • Gabriel Marcel
  • Reinhold Niebuhr
  • Charles Hartshorne
  • Mircea Eliade
  • Frithjof Schuon
  • J L Mackie
  • Walter Kaufmann
  • Martin Lings
  • Peter Geach
  • George I Mavrodes
  • William Alston
  • Antony Flew
  • William L Rowe
  • Dewi Z Phillips
  • Alvin Plantinga
  • Anthony Kenny
  • Nicholas Wolterstorff
  • Richard Swinburne
  • Robert Merrihew Adams
  • Peter van Inwagen
  • Daniel Dennett
  • Loyal Rue
  • Jean-Luc Marion
  • William Lane Craig
  • Ali Akbar Rashad
  • Alexander Pruss
Related topics
  • Criticism of religion
  • Ethics in religion
  • Exegesis
  • History of religion
  • Religion
  • Religious language
  • Religious philosophy
  • Relationship between religion and science
  • Political science of religion
  • Faith and rationality
  • more...
  • Portal
  • Category
  • v
  • t
  • e
World viewRelated terms
  • Basic beliefs/Beliefs
  • Collective consciousness/Collective unconscious
  • Conceptual system
  • Context
  • Conventions
  • Cultural movement
  • Epic poetry/National epics/Pan-national epics
  • Facts and factoids
  • Framing
  • Ideology
  • Life stance
  • Lifestyle
  • Memes/Memeplex
  • Mental model
  • Metanarrative
  • Mindset
  • Norms
  • Paradigm
  • Philosophical theory
  • Point of view
  • Presuppositions
  • Reality tunnel
  • Received view
  • Schemata
  • School of thought
  • Set
  • Social reality
  • Theory of everything
  • Umwelt
  • Value system
  • Academic
  • Attentional
  • Attitude polarization
  • Belief
  • Cognitive (list)
  • Collective narcissism
  • Confirmation
  • Congruence
  • Cryptomnesia
  • Cultural
  • Ethnocentrism
  • Filter bubble
  • Homophily
  • In-group favoritism
  • Magical thinking
  • Media
  • Observer-expectancy
  • Observational error
  • Selective exposure
  • Selective perception
  • Self-deception
  • Self-fulfilling prophecy (Clever Hans impact, placebo impact, wishful thinking)
  • Status quo
  • Stereotyping
Change and
  • Activism
  • Argument
  • Argumentum ad populum
  • Attitude change
  • Censorship
  • Charisma
  • Circular reporting
  • Cognitive dissonance
  • Critical thinking
  • Crowd manipulation
  • Cultural dissonance
  • Deprogramming
  • Echo chamber
  • Education (spiritual, values)
  • Euphemism
  • Excommunication
  • Fearmongering
  • Historical revisionism
  • Ideological repression
  • Indoctrination
  • Media manipulation
  • Media regulation
  • Mind control
  • Missionaries
  • Moral entrepreneurship
  • Persuasion
  • Polite fiction
  • Political engineering
  • Propaganda
  • Propaganda model
  • Proselytism
  • Psychological manipulation
  • Psychological warfare
  • Religious conversion (forced)
  • Religious persecution
  • Religious uniformity
  • Revolutions
  • Rhetoric
  • Self-censorship
  • Social change
  • Social control
  • Social engineering
  • Social influence
  • Social progress
  • Suppression of dissent
  • Systemic bias
  • Woozle effect
  • Anthropology (cultural, social)
  • Calendars
  • Ceremonies
  • Coronations
  • Cross-cultural psychology
  • Cultural psychology
  • Doctrine
  • Employment/Serfdom/Slavery
  • Families
  • Funerals/Burial
  • Games
  • Holidays
  • Hygiene (ritual)
  • Identity (philosophy) (cultural)
  • organizations
  • Liminality
  • Liturgy
  • Marriage
  • Myth and ritual
  • Oaths
  • Pilgrimages
  • Play
  • Rites of passage (secular)
  • Rituals
  • Social class/Social status/Caste
  • Symbols
  • Symbolic boundaries
  • Worship
  • Abilene paradox
  • Bandwagon effect
  • Collectives
  • Collective behavior (animal)
  • Collective effervescence
  • Collective intelligence
  • Conformity
  • Consensus theory
  • Crowd psychology
  • Cults
  • Culture-bound syndromes
  • Deindividuation
  • Democracy
  • Emergence
  • Emotional contagion
  • Entitativity
  • False-consensus effect
  • Folie � deux
  • Group action
  • Group dynamics
  • Group emotion
  • Group polarization
  • Groupshift
  • Herd behavior
  • Holism
  • Hysterical contagion
  • Information cascade
  • Invisible hand
  • Lynching
  • Majoritarianism/Ochlocracy
  • Mass action
  • Mass hysteria
  • Mass psychogenic illness
  • Milieu control
  • Mobbing
  • Moral panic
  • Organizations
  • Peer pressure
  • Pluralistic ignorance
  • Political correctness
  • Pseudoconsensus
  • Scapegoating
  • Self-organization
  • Social action
  • Social behavior
  • Social emotions
  • Social exclusion
  • Social facilitation (animal)
  • Social group
  • Social proof
  • Social psychology
  • Sociology
  • Spontaneous order
  • Status quo
  • Stigmergy
  • Swarm behaviour
  • System justification
  • Viral phenomena
  • Axioms (tacit assumptions)
  • Conceptual framework
  • Epistemology (outline)
  • Evidence (anecdotal, scientific)
  • Explanations
  • Faith (fideism)
  • Gnosis
  • Intuition
  • Meaning-making
  • Memory
  • Metaknowledge
  • Methodology
  • Observation
  • Observational learning
  • Perception
  • Reasoning (fallacious, logic)
  • Revelation
  • Testimony
  • Tradition (folklore)
  • Truth (consensus concept, criteria)
  • Ætiology
  • Afterlife
  • Anima mundi
  • Being
  • Causality
  • Concepts
  • Consciousness (mind–body problem)
  • Cosmogony
  • Cosmology (religious)
  • Creation myth
  • Deities (existence)
  • Destiny
  • Eschatology
  • Everything/Nothing
  • Evolution
  • Existence
  • Fiction/Non-fiction
  • Free will
  • Future
  • History
  • Ideas
  • Idios kosmos
  • Illusions
  • Incarnation
  • Information
  • Intelligence
  • Magic
  • Matter
  • Miracles
  • Mythology (comparative)
  • National mythoi
  • Nature (philosophical)
  • Ontology
  • Origin myths (political fables)
  • Otherworlds (axes mundi)
  • Problem of evil
  • Physics (natural philosophy)
  • Reality
  • Souls
  • Spirit
  • Supernature
  • Teleology
  • Theology
  • Time
  • Unobservables
  • Æsthetics
  • Almsgiving/Charity
  • Altruism
  • Autonomy
  • Beauty
  • Codes of conduct
  • Comedy
  • Common good
  • Conscience
  • Consent
  • Creativity
  • Disgust
  • Duty
  • Economics
  • Ecstasy (emotional, religious)
  • Elegance
  • Emotions (æsthetic)
  • Entertainment
  • Eroticism
  • Ethics
  • Étiquette
  • Family values
  • Food and drink prohibitions (unclean animals)
  • Golden Rule
  • Guilt/Culpability
  • joy
  • Harmony
  • Honour
  • Human rights
  • Judgement
  • Justice
  • Laws (jurisprudence, religious)
  • Liberty (political freedom)
  • Love
  • Magnificence
  • Maxims
  • Meaning of life
  • Morality (public)
  • Obligations
  • Peace
  • Piety
  • Praxeology
  • Principles
  • Punishment
  • Qualities
  • Repentance
  • Reverence
  • Rights
  • Sexuality (ethics)
  • Sin
  • Social stigma
  • Stewardship
  • Styles
  • Sublime, The
  • Suffering
  • Sympathy
  • Taboo
  • Taste
  • Theodicy
  • Trust
  • Unspoken rules
  • Virtues and Vices
  • Works of art
  • Wrongdoing
  • Nihilism
  • Optimism
  • Pessimism
  • Reclusion
  • Weltschmerz
Economic and
political ideologies
  • Authoritarianism
  • Anarchism
  • Capitalism
  • Christian democracy
  • Collectivism
  • Colonialism
  • Communalism
  • Communism
  • Communitarianism
  • Conservatism
  • Constitutionalism
  • Distributism
  • Environmentalism
  • Extremism
  • Fanaticism
  • Fascism
  • Feminism
  • Fundamentalism
  • Globalism
  • Green politics
  • Imperialism
  • Individualism
  • Industrialism
  • Intellectualism
  • Islamism
  • Liberalism
  • Libertarianism
  • Masculism
  • Militarism
  • Monarchism
  • Nationalism
  • Pacifism
  • Progressivism
  • Radicalism
  • Reformism
  • Republicanism
  • Sentientism
  • Social democracy
  • Socialism
  • Utilitarianism
  • Veganism
  • African traditional religions
  • Bahá'í
  • Buddhism
  • Cao Dai
  • Cheondoism
  • Chinese conventional religions
  • Christianity
  • Ethnic religions
  • Hòa Hảo
  • Hinduism
  • Islam
  • Jainism
  • Judaism
  • Korean shamanism
  • Neo-Paganism
  • Rastafarianism
  • Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist
  • Shinto
  • Sikhism
  • Spiritism
  • Taoism
  • Tenrikyo
  • Tenriism
  • Unitarian Universalism
  • Zoroastrianism
Schools of
  • Agriculturalism
  • Aristotelianism
  • Atomism
  • Averroism
  • Cartesianism
  • Cārvāka
  • Collectivism
  • Confucianism/New Confucianism
  • Critical theory
  • Cynicism
  • Cyrenaics
  • Determinism
  • Dualism
  • Eleatics
  • Empiricism
  • Eretrian school
  • Epicureanism
  • Existentialism
  • Foundationalism
  • Hedonism
  • Hegelianism
  • Hermeneutics
  • Historicism/New Historicism
  • Holism
  • Humanism/Renaissance humanism
  • Illuminationism
  • ʿIlm al-Kalām
  • Idealism
  • Individualism
  • Ionian
  • Kantianism/Neo-Kantianism
  • Kokugaku
  • Legalism
  • Logicians
  • Materialism
  • Mohism
  • Megarian school
  • Modernism/Postmodernism
  • Monism
  • Natural Law
  • Naturalism (Chinese)
  • Naturalism (western)
  • Nihilism
  • Peripatetic
  • Phenomenology
  • Platonism/Neoplatonism
  • Pluralism
  • Positivism
  • Pragmatism
  • Presocratic
  • Pyrrhonism
  • Pythagoreanism/Neopythagoreanism
  • Rationalism
  • Reductionism
  • Scholasticism/Neo-Scholasticism
  • Sentientism
  • Social constructionism
  • Sophism
  • Spinozism
  • Stoicism
  • Structuralism/Post-structuralism
  • Thomism
  • Transcendentalism
  • Utilitarianism
  • Yangism
Retrieved from ""

How to cite this essay: