Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T16:45:33.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Otto and Numinous Experience1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

David Bastow
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, University of Dundee

Extract

The basic position of Otto in The Idea of the Holy2 may be stated as follows:

All religions involve and rest on experience of the numinous, which affords a positive knowledge of the central object of religion - God. This position is what may be called a Theory of Religion: like Freud's explanation of religion in terms of father figures, and Durkheim's claim that religion is society's celebration of itself, it claims to give an explanation of the phenomenon of religion - the fact that men belong to religions etc. Unlike some of its rivals, this Theory of Religion does not explain religion away; the explanation is intended to be compatible with religious belief; the explanatory concepts are supposed to be concepts from within religion. If Otto had just argued that religion was, or some religions were, true, his claims would have been only of theological interest. But what makes his writings especially important is that he looks at religion not merely as a theologian, but also as a phenomenologist; he is concerned to explain religion and religions as they are; even to explain the diversity of religions (with a version of evolutionism). It would be over-simple, but not entirely wide of the truth, to say that he first looks at religions in the sensitive but neutral manner of the phenomenologist, to decide what are the central phenomena of religion; and then puts forward a theological explanation of these phenomena. At least, this is what for much of his book he aims to do.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 159 note 2 The Idea of the Holy, trans. Harvey, J. W. (O.U.P. third impression, 1925).Google Scholar

page 159 note 3 The Philosophy of Religion Based on Kant and Fries, trans. Dicker, E. B. (London, 1931).Google Scholar

page 160 note 1 See for example Ninian, Smart, The Phenomenon of Religion (London, 1973)Google Scholar and Michael, Pye, Comparative Religion (Newton Abbot, 1972).Google Scholar

page 161 note 1 I am afraid that my knowledge of Fries comes not from his own writings, none of which has, as far as I know, been translated into English, but from Otto's The Philosophy of Religion and, much more importantly, from Leonard, Nelson, Progress and Regress in Philosophy, trans. Humphrey, Palmer (Oxford, 1971).Google Scholar The following account will be obscure to readers who are not acquainted with Kant's first Critique, but seems to me to be necessary to a proper understanding of Otto.

page 166 note 1 The phrase ‘sense of presence’ is unfortunately ambiguous in a relevant way; it may mean a quasi-perceptual feeling that God is present, or merely a belief, of indeterminate origin, that God is present.