The paper isn't up yet on the
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences website,
www.pnas.org...
nor on Epley's own personal page on the Business School website (URL given in the OP article link). The UChi press release was posted only yesterday
Central Standard Time:
www.eurekalert.org...
So, I cannot comment on the product, only the ads for it. Assuming the ads are truthful, we learn, as if for the first time:
People who believe in God try to infer God's will. In doing so, they rely upon their beliefs, among which are their beliefs about God and what God
wills. Their conclusions reflect the premises upon which they rely.
This is shocking news? Why? About
religion? No, this is how human reasoning in general works.
(Umm, note to Professor Epley, assuming the remark attributed to him in both the OP article and the press release is accurate:
The central feature of a compass, however, is that it points north no matter what direction a person is facing. This research suggests that,
unlike an actual compass, inferences about God's beliefs may instead point people further in whatever direction they are already facing.
Magnetic compasses' "north" is truly north of you only when you are standing in the right place, that is, truly south of the Earth's northern
magnetic pole.
Otherwise, when someone aligns the pointer on the letter
N, and assumes that that is truly north, then they will be wrong.
It would be odd to blame the compass for the mistake of the person reading it. Odder still to blame the planet's magnetic poles for being where they
are, rather than where it would be convenient for them to be instead.
Nevertheless, a magnetic compass is useful, despite the possible misunderstanding of the human using the instrument. Most people can usually acquire a
better idea about where north is from reading a compass than they can form without it.
Perhaps that is the standard by which to judge all moral reflection, including that of people who believe in God and try to infer God's will, as best
they can, with the mind they have. Is their decision closer to something plausibly beneficial than they would have come up with by reflecting on
something else?)
[edit on 1-12-2009 by eight bits]