PHILOSOPHY - RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE AS SYMBOLIC

Question 1

PAUL TILLICH BACKGROUND

Answer 1

• GERMAN PHILOSOPHER
• FOCUS ON GOD AND HOW HE IS DISCUSSED
• SYMBOLS = ‘A PATTERN THAT POINTS TO A METAPHYSICAL REALITY ‘

Question 2

PAUL TILLICH THEORY

Answer 2

SIGNS AND SYMBOLS
- DIFFERENT; SIGNS = PRIVIDE SIMPLE INFO I.E. A STOP SIGN, SYMBOLS = NATIONAL FLAGS
SYMBOLS = PROVIDE INFO AS WELL AS HAVING A DEEPER MEANING I.E. THE SYMBOL OF THE CROSS TELLS US ABOUT THE SACRIFICE OF JESUS, AS WELL AS THE DEEPER MEANING IF THE CONCEPT OF ATONEMENT AND AN OMNIBEVEVOLENT GOD
DECIDED THAT SYMBOLS ARE NON COGNITIVE, HOWEVER SAID THIS WAS OK AS THEY POINT TO A METAPHYSICAL REALITY

Question 3

JOHN RANDELL BACKGROUND

Answer 3

• AMERICAN PHILOSOPHER
• ARGUED THAT SYMBOLS HAVE THE ABILITY TO GIVE PEOPLE A SHARED IDENTITY I.E. MANC WORKER BEE

Question 6

JOHN RANDELL THEORY

Answer 6

SIGNS = MUNDANE RESPONSE TO SOMETHING
SYMBOLS = PROVOKE AN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO SOMETHING I.E. WORKER BEE = UNITY AND HARD WORK
2 TYPES OF SYMBOL; SCIENTIFIC AND RELIGIOUS
SCIENTIFIC = FACTUAL & COGNITIVE
RELIGIOUS = NON COGNITIVE, UNABLE TO BE EMPIRICALLY PROVEN

Question 7

JOHN RANDELL USEFULNESS OF SYMBOLS

Answer 7

1. BIND A GROUP OF PEOPLE
   - SHARED IDENTITY
2. MOTIVATORS
   - REASON TO DO RELIGIOUS ACTS
3. COMMUNICATORS
   - IMPORTANT INFO

Question 8

CHALLENGES TO RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS

Answer 8

1. MEANINGLESS
   - NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE THEREFORE MEANINGLESS ACCORDING TO THE VERIFICATION PRINCIPLE
2. TOO SYMBOLIC
   - PROBLEM FOR SOME RELIGIOUS LANG I.E. HEAVEN, IMPLIES THEY AREN’T REAL
3. NON STATIC
   - MEANINGS OF SYMBOLS CHANGES OVER TIME - SWASTIKA WAS FIRST ASSOCIATED WITH HINDUISM