Summary Of Religious Exclusivists Often Go Wrong By David Basinger

In his essay “Religious diversity: Where exclusivists often go wrong”, David Basinger argues that religious exclusivists, even if they are not obligated to do so, should examine their basic, core beliefs; especially when such beliefs are a subject of discussion in peer conflicts. As a result of this view, he continues to state that exclusivists who fail to see the importance in such an examination “have in a sense gone wrong” (Basinger 43). This essay will summarize and provide counterpoints to the arguments presented by David Basinger in his essay “Religious diversity: Where exclusivists often go wrong.

According to Basinger “an exclusivist is someone who believes that her perspective on a given issue is superior in the sense that she believes that her perspective alone is true or is at least closer to the truth than any other perspective” (43). Exclusivism-in the context of this essay-exists as a direct result of religious diversity. Diversity in religion is created by differing, irreconcilable beliefs found throughout various

Notable exclusivists in the philosophical world believe there is no need for exclusivists to acknowledge they are in direct disagreement with epistemic peers. This belief is grounded in the idea that in order for an exclusivist to designate someone as a true epistemic peer, he or she must have aligning beliefs (Basinger 46). This conclusion can be drawn from the definition of exclusivism given by Basinger. If someone is a true exclusivist they believe that their perspective in a given situation is superior to all other beliefs. Therefore, in order for someone to be a true epistemic peer in the mind of an exclusivist, their beliefs would need to be aligned. Thus, as a result of this belief, there is no need to question the validity one’s own