20th Century Religious Language Essays Flashcards

Question

counter para 1 essay 3

Answer 1

Anything could be meaningful as long as there is an agreed understanding. For example , in the ‘unicorns exist’ game it would be meaningful to say unicorns are real. But unicorns do not really exist. Similarly, language is subjective and meaningful only within the ‘game’. Peter Greach - Language Game theory is a circular argument - the world takes its meaning from the game. but the game takes its meaning from the words within it , which take their meaning from the game and so on. Wittgenstein states that when someone makes a religious statement it is subjective to the rules of that language game of religion they have adopted. This means the meaning and definition of their religious language would be influenced by the cultures and behavioral rules associated with that statement. So when someone says ‘God exists’ they may not objectively be saying that God exists , but instead making claims to the language games. Most religious people would disagree and state that when they do make religious claims so do they mean it objectively. , e.g. saying ‘God exists’ they do mean that God objectively exists. Result in theological

Answer 2

Meaning depends on the group in which the language is being used. No one from outside the group can criticize the language or claim it is false , therefore religious language is meaningful.

Answer 3

DZ Phillips - Language games make it possible to talk about religious language in a meaningful way. Statements such as ‘God exists’ are not grounded in belief , rather are expressions of belief and can be understood in context of belief , therefore a non-believer may not understand but this does not mean the statement is meaningless. Religious language , according to Philips is beyond the discussion of fact (cognitive). It can be meaningful whether it is cognitive or non-cognitive because it depends on the form of life in which it is spoken. Language games provide a useful defense of meaning for religious statements. Approach shows how religious statements do hold meaning for believers and that lack of understanding , due to restriction from adopting rules of language games, does not mean they do not have meaning.

Answer 4

From last bit - It is usually true that when people make religious claims, they ,mean them objectively true and that they are referring to reality. Also, seems to be indicating that religious statements do not need evidence, unlike the verification and falsification principle which states this is essential. Presents a problem because its one of the main reasons why people become atheist are non-religious is due to the lack of available evidence for religion . The lack of evidence explains this loss of faith and its important to consider the significance of evidence - Wittgenstein seemingly does not acknowledge the importance of empirical evidence and its clash with faith. Cuppit - language games show that religious language is non-cognitive and therefore does not have an objective meaning outside of a religious form of life.

Answer 5

Does Aquinas or Wittgenstein have a better approach to religious language

Answer 6

Aquinas = 13th Century Philosopher. Christian, Cognitive, Wittgenstein = 20th Century Philosopher. agnostic, non-cognitive.

Answer 7

aquinas is better

Answer 8

Analogy of attribution - Words we apply to human beings are related to now words are applied to God because there is a casual relationship between the two sets of qualities. Our qualities such as love and wisdom are reflections of those of God. Example - Medieval Times - BULLS URINE - if the bull is helathy then the urine is healthy. ‘If the urine is good, then the bull is good’. Likewise, by examining human qualities we see a reflection of those divine attributes. Analogy of proper proportion - The extent to which a being can be said to have certain properties in proportion to the type of being we are describing. To say that a 10 yr old is a good footballer is different to saying that an England international footballer is a good footballer. When we say that a human is ‘good’ we are speaking of a finite being - when describing God, we are speaking of an infinite being so the ‘goodness’ is in proportion to that. Aquinas = Religious language puts forward factual statements about supernatural reality. - Fits with most believers understanding of what they are doing when they say God exists - they are asserting a fact e.g. when a religious believers claim that God is omnipotent , they are aiming to say factually that God is all powerful. Strength of Aquinas - Analogies allow something positive to be said about God without anthropomorphising or agnosticism

Answer 9

Wittgenstein - 20th century Agnostic - We know God , words have meaning to those that use them so God is known. Religious Language isnt just the asserting of facts, but a commitment to a way of life. - Non cognitive approaches make more sense than a cognitive approach. Strengths of W = Religious Statements have meaning but it depends on the context of the language game. Language Games do not reflect reality but make it; reality is subjective There can be no criticisms of religious language , you can only play a ‘different game’ , with other rules , for example the verification game.

Answer 10

Weaknesses of W - Believers use language to express truth and reality , so Wittgenstein’s approach does work for them. Since religious language cannot be criticised or challenged , it could lead to dangerous beliefs based on faith alone, without reason (fideism).

Answer 11

Strengths of Aquinas = Hick - argues that teachings and actions of Jesus give us some clearer ideas of how and what to say about God.

Answer 12

Weaknesses of Aquinas = Analogy is too vague , bcos we dont know we are speaking accurately about God. Analogy makes an assumption that there is a similarity between finite humans and an infinite God. Wittgenstein = Recognises that religious and scientific statements are 2 differeny types of things that deserve to be treated differently. Theory recognises the meaning is not fixed but changes with use and context. It recognises that there are beliefs we have that are grounded. We cannot necessarily provide reasons for them yet they shape our world. Only those ‘within the game’ are able to understand religious language.

Answer 13

Weaknesses of W= A believer may reject the idea that religious statements only have meaning to the individual. They may (like flew and Mitchell argue ) see them truth claims. They believe themselves to be meaning cognitive statements. It has been argues that language games give words their meaning, yet the game itself is just a collection of words. Critics claim that Wittgenstein over analyses ;amnguage. He ‘takes apart a perfectly working clock and the wonders why it doesn’t work - (Gellner).