1.8+9 Religious language Flashcards
Strong verification
A statement only has meaning if it can be verified or it is a tautology.
Weak verification
Refers to statements that can be shown to be probably by observation and experience.
Ayer’s putative propositions
- They went distinguished as practical verifiability which referred to statements that could be tested in reality and
- Were verifiable in principle where statements were verifiable in essence without necessarily observing it through experience.
When is something meaningful, according to Flew and the falsification principle?
It is only meaningful to say something is good if it can be seen not to be good e.g. school - ‘school is good’ can only be seen to be meaningful if there is evidence to suggest otherwise.
Blik
An unfalsifiable way of framing our understanding of our experiences which help us to find meaning in the world.
Why did Mitchell argue that religious statements have factual content?
Our beliefs will one day be shown to be right and wrong.
John Hick (falsification)
Eschatological verification
Karl Popper
- Popper believed that statements are scientific if our empirical experiences could potentially falsify them.
- The falsification principle aims to improve upon the limited verification principle since, as argued by Ayer, all statements can be classed as meaningful, by suggesting that a statement is factually meaningless if there are no falsification criteria.
Surface and depth grammar
Whether you understand a word on surface level or in depth.
D.Z. Phillips
Religious language is a way of defining the rules of the game of religion e.g. saying God is good is only a way of describing how the word ‘God’ can be used
Religion cannot be grounded or criticised in reason because it is a system all of its own.
Who proposed the theory of analogy?
Aquinas
Analogy of proper proportion
We possess traits like God’s because we were created in his image and likeness
Hick (via positiva)
Calling a dog faithful isn’t the same as calling a person faithful
What are Tillich’s 4 main functions of symbol?
- They point to something beyond themselves.
- They participate in that to which they point.
- Symbols open up levels of reality that are otherwise closed to us.
• They participate in the Ultimate Reality that we cannot understand - They also open up levels and dimensions of the soul that correspond to those levels of reality.
What kind of theory is symbol? (Cognitive or non-cognitive)
Non-cognitive
MacQuarrie
Tillich’s distinction between sign and symbol is not true and gives the example of clouds signifying rain.
Symbol is to be seen twofold – the conventional symbol (apps on a phone) and the intrinsic symbol (the Kinship in the Eucharist).
What does MacQuarrie argue is the value of symbol?
- They bring about an existential response; symbols remind us of feelings such as loyalty or awe-recognising we should have the same response to God.
- They also bring about a similarity of relation; similar to analogies, the symbol of the shepherd is the fact that we are the sheep to God.
What does the via negativa aim to do?
Aims to move beyond language altogether to the ‘divine darkness’ that lies beyond any concept.
Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa
Pointed to the human inability to know the essence of God. They argue that if we cannot know the mind and essence of an ant, we can never begin to understand God.
Pseudo-Dionysius
Human language is hopelessly inadequate in trying to describe the ineffable God.
Three ways of speaking of God:
1. Via negativa – states that God is not.
2. State of affirmation – Affirm what we know God is. We do know God has been revealed in the Bible as good and just. These terms must be taken symbolically.
3. Qualification – When we say God is loving, He is utterly beyond loving so we need to qualify what we mean.
Maimonides
God is transcendent, so it is impossible to say what God is.
People come to an understanding of what God is not and therefore move closer to appreciating what God is.
Since God is the creator of the universe, he cannot be something bodily since anything bodily is part of the universe.
Only something which is not a body could account for there being a universe of physical objects.
Kierkegaard and Plantinga
Faith is beyond reason
Swinburne
Example of toys in a cupboard
Argues that a univocal understanding of God still works since we could say both God and humans are good but apply the goodness of God to a greater degree. Agreed by Duns Scotus.
C.S. Evans
Dismisses Hare’s critiques by saying that there is no clear difference between ‘bliks’ being right or wrong.