James opens by explaining to his audience that he is a psychologist, not a theologian or religious scholar. He confines his study of religion to the feelings and experiences of individuals. James uses documents written by religious figures to draw conclusions about religious experience. However, he points out that religious figures are often prone to psychological instability and that it is important to acknowledge the full picture of an individual’s psychology when studying personal relationships with religion.

While James feels it is important to gain a comprehensive understanding, he also criticizes psychologists who dismiss a person’s religious revelation as a manifestation of a psychological or health issue. He suggests that a strict adherence to medical materialism obstructs a larger picture of spiritual significance: “Otherwise none of our thoughts and feelings, not even our scientific doctrines, not even our dis-beliefs, could retain any value as revelations of truth” (14). When considering religious experience, it is important to look at the whole.

Rather than focusing on the history of religious institutions or assessing the inherent value of a particular religion, James emphasizes value as it pertains to an individual’s inner experiences, or revelations.