1.8+9 Religious language

Question 1

Strong verification

Answer 1

A statement only has meaning if it can be verified or it is a tautology.

Question 2

Weak verification

Answer 2

Refers to statements that can be shown to be probably by observation and experience.

Question 3

Ayer’s putative propositions

Answer 3

1. They went distinguished as practical verifiability which referred to statements that could be tested in reality and
2. Were verifiable in principle where statements were verifiable in essence without necessarily observing it through experience.

Question 4

When is something meaningful, according to Flew and the falsification principle?

Answer 4

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.

Question 5

Blik

Answer 5

An unfalsifiable way of framing our understanding of our experiences which help us to find meaning in the world.

Question 6

Why did Mitchell argue that religious statements have factual content?

Answer 6

Our beliefs will one day be shown to be right and wrong.

Question 7

John Hick (falsification)

Answer 7

Eschatological verification

Question 8

Karl Popper

Answer 8

• 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.

Question 9

Surface and depth grammar

Answer 9

Whether you understand a word on surface level or in depth.

Question 10

D.Z. Phillips

Answer 10

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.

Question 11

Who proposed the theory of analogy?

Answer 11

Aquinas

Question 12

Analogy of proper proportion

Answer 12

We possess traits like God’s because we were created in his image and likeness

Question 13

Hick (via positiva)

Answer 13

Calling a dog faithful isn’t the same as calling a person faithful

Question 14

What are Tillich’s 4 main functions of symbol?

Answer 14

1. They point to something beyond themselves.
2. They participate in that to which they point.
3. Symbols open up levels of reality that are otherwise closed to us.
   • They participate in the Ultimate Reality that we cannot understand
4. They also open up levels and dimensions of the soul that correspond to those levels of reality.

Question 15

What kind of theory is symbol? (Cognitive or non-cognitive)

Answer 15

Non-cognitive

Question 16

MacQuarrie

Answer 16

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).

Question 17

What does MacQuarrie argue is the value of symbol?

Answer 17

1. 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.
2. 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.

Question 18

What does the via negativa aim to do?

Answer 18

Aims to move beyond language altogether to the ‘divine darkness’ that lies beyond any concept.

Question 19

Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa

Answer 19

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.

Question 20

Pseudo-Dionysius

Answer 20

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.

Question 21

Maimonides

Answer 21

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.

Question 22

Kierkegaard and Plantinga

Answer 22

Faith is beyond reason

Question 23

Swinburne

Answer 23

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.

Question 24

C.S. Evans

Answer 24

Dismisses Hare’s critiques by saying that there is no clear difference between ‘bliks’ being right or wrong.

Question 25

Peter Donovan

Answer 25

The idea of ‘language games’ enables one to understand how religion has meaning, rather than religions being a game.

Question 26

Freud

Answer 26

“Analogies prove nothing, that is true… but they can make one feel more at home.”

Question 27

Ian Ramsey

Answer 27

Modernised the theory of analogies. Used a theory of ‘models and qualifiers’ wherein we model our understanding of God on human language but use qualifiers so not to limit God with our own knowledge

Question 28

William Blackstone

Answer 28

Argued that Aquinas’ doctrine was unhelpful since we have to use univocal language before our analogies even make sense. Human love/God’s love. We are still left with an unclear picture.

Question 29

Karl Barth

Answer 29

Argues that Ramsey’s approach and analogy in general is mistaken because we cannot approach God by means of language without revelation.

Question 30

Bruner

Answer 30

Analogy gives the appearance of saying something significant about God but that we remain as ignorant as we were before. Argues that when we attempt to use analogy of proportion, we are making assumptions, which we are not entitled to make as we lack the necessary knowledge to speak with any authority.

Question 31

Ferre

Answer 31

Argues that the value of analogy is that it provides us with a rule for enabling us to use theological language about God. He argues that we should not concentrate on how analogies might be thought to define transcendental ideas such as the idea of God as the ‘first cause’, because we do not know the nature of God.

Question 32

J.H. Randall

Answer 32

Religious symbols serve four important functions:

1. A motivational one, he says that it fires up our passionate emotions.
2. A social one, he states that people have a common social understanding of symbols, strengthens the social bonds.
3. A communicate one, symbols express religious faith better than religious language can ever hope to achieve in a million years.
4. Religious symbols can clarify and disclose our experience of the divine in the same way as a poet or artist can reveal hidden depths. It would be like someone trying to explain the Mona Lisa, an impossible task even to modern day humans.

Question 33

John Scotus

Answer 33

“God is beyond all meaning and intelligence, and he alone possesses immortality. His light is called darkness because of its excellence, as no creature can comprehend either what or how it is.”