✅20th Century Perspective Flashcards
Who are the logical positivist
Concerned with the relationship between the use of language and knowledge, rejecting it as meaningless if what they saw was non cognitive.
Who were the founders of the Vienna group
Moritz schlick and Rudolph Carnap. Influenced by Wittgenstein.
When did the logical positivist form
1920’s
What did Wittgenstein say in his book to start the logical positivist
Suggested that meaningful language is connected with the things we know from our senses. The logical positivist used this to question if religious language is meaningless.
What Wittgenstein’s book called
Tractatus
Whereof we cannot know, thereof we cannot speak.
Wittgenstein
What was Ayers role
He was influenced by Vienna circle. Educated at oxford and Eton. He developed the verification principle and decided that logical positivist had uncovered significant problems with religious language.
Ayers book
Language, truth and logic at the age of 24.
1936
What did Ayer think of metaphysics
Describes any reality that lies beyond our senses. Ayer was only interested in what could be known through the senses, therefore Ayer thought it should be ditched.
Who said: commit it then to the flames, for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion
Hume
Verification principle definition
A statement which cannot be conclusively verified, is simply devoid of meaning.
The 2 types of statements that are meaningful
Analytical: 2+2=4 etc.
Synthetical: it’s raining outside etc.
Ayer thought religious claims are non cognitive and impossible to verify so they are meaningless.
What is the problem with non cognitive facts being meaningless?
Problem of history: this would mean all history is meaningless.
Humes fork
Ayers philosophy is pinched by humes fork. Hume asserts there are 2 distinct classes of things, rational and empirical. And only the empirical can tell is useful things about the world.
How did Ayer get around the problem of verification
Ayer developer the weak verification protocol, which means things such as history can be meaningful. Instead of checking every bit of knowledge without logic and sense, we only have to say HOW it can be verified and then it is considered meaningful.
What is strong verification principle
An assertion only has meaning if it can be verified according to empirical information
What is weak verification principle
For an assertion to be tru, one simply has to state what kind of evidence ou would verify its contents. Eg, hitler invaded Poland. It is meaningful, fiction would come from eyewitnesses of the tanks rolling in etc.
Strengths of verification principle
Clear cut, provides answers. Statements about God fail the test and are hence meaningless.
Weaknesses of verification principle
Verification principle in itself is neither analytical or synthetical and therefore is meaningless itself.
Philosophical claims are neither tautologically or empirically verifiable but this doesn’t mean they are completely empty of all cognitive significance.
Weak Would mean the bible is meaningful and therefore god is meaningful and HENCE doesn’t work as itself as a theory
Brian Magee on weaknesses of the verification principle
People began to realise that this glittering new scalpel was, one operation after another, killing the patient.
Brian Magee book
Confessions of a philosopher.
Richard Swinburne criticism of verification principle
There are propositions which no one knows how to verify but they are still meaningful. Toys coming out of the cupboard at night and dance around. There is no trace and hence can’t be verified, but the is doesn’t mean they aren’t meaningless.
Hicks criticism on verification
Talk of god might be verifiable in principle. There could be evidence in the future. Future possibility: eschatological verification.
Allegory of the celetrial city
Allegory of the celetrial city
Theist and an atheist both walking down the same road. Theist believes there is a destination, atheist believes there isn’t. If they reach the estimation, the theist would be proved right. If they don’t, the atheist would be proved right.
Can be verified after death
Brummers be verification principle
Treat sentences of faith as if they were scientific sentences.
Brummers quote
The effect of this mindset for the way religious faith is understood has been disasterous
Dorothy emmets Response against verification principle
They fail to und Rostand the nature of metaphysical thinking. Natural theology should be understood though analogy.
Faith isn’t about having a complete explanation, it’s an attempt to express and understand.
Who began falsification principle
Karl popper rejected the findings of the logical positivist, and argued it was bad science. Science shouldn’t be looking for a continuous verification of its propositions, but falsification.
Who developed poppers points
Flew. VP suggests there will be bright sunshine somewhere tomorrow. FP suggests there will be thundery showers at 3pm in Leicester tomorrow. Latter is better as it puts forward more specifics and unlikely to fail.
Flews position
Theological utterances are not assertions, they have no cognitive meaning. Denies reoogicl language is meaningful
Hares position.
Flew said it is right to say theological utterances are not assertions, however they are BLIKS and so are meaningful.
Mitchell’s position
Theological utterances are many as assertions and they are very meaningful to those who hold onto them. for those who believe
FLEW ARGUMENT
Only meaningful if we can conceive of some evidence which migh count against it. Problem with God talk is that it can’t be falsified, can’t be disproved. Dies a death of a thousand qualifications: leaky bucket argument. Scientists make statements and test it to destruction: if all falsified, then hypothesis is real. Parable of the gardener
Parable of the gardener
From John Wisdom.
But there is a gardener, invisible, intangible, insensible. A gardener who has no scent and makes no sound.
How does this gardener differ from an imaginary Gardner or even no gardener at all?
Religious people WONT accept any challenges, as nothing ca sway their beliefs.
What does the death by a thousand qualifications means
Flew mean that when a religious believer is challenged about God, their response is to modify the ay they talk about god to respond to the challenge that they are trying to qualify. By using equally vague and unfalsifiable statements,
HARES ARGUMENT
Not on complete same ground as flew. “On the grounds marked our by flew…” hare uses parable of the lunatic. To suggest that flew is standing on the wrong ground to be able to understand religious assertions,
Parable of the lunatic
Convinced that all the dons want to murder him. His friends introduce him to all and they’re all nice. But the lunatic says they’re all cunning and lying. He’s really plotting to kill me. His reaction is all the same no matter how many nice dons he meets.
This parable shows the non-changing nature of religious people. Doesn’t matter what evidence proves them otherwise, they still believe in God.
hares bliks
The lunatics assumptions of the dons differs to that of everyone else’s. Blik describe the way in high people see and interpret the world. A basic, unprovable assumption that gives not explanation to the user. It is no falsifiable and it doesn’t make factual claims about the world.
