religious language

Question 1

what is the debate about religious experience

+for and against

Answer 1

is it possible to talk meaningfully about God? - epistemic distance
Bible, holy trinity, omni-
reliant on faith, nothing can ever be proved

Question 2

John

Answer 2

1 John 4:8

anyone who does not know love, does not know God, because God is love

Question 3

what is idolatry

Answer 3

worshipping an idea/image of God that’s inaccurate or false

Question 4

what is anthropomorphism

Answer 4

ascribing human characteristics to something that’s not human

Question 5

what is transcendent

Answer 5

God’s nature can’t be described/contained in ordinary language

Question 6

what is univocal

Answer 6

a word only has one possible meaning

Question 7

what is equivocal

Answer 7

word has different meaning in different contexts

Question 8

what is analogical

Answer 8

relating to/based on analogy

Question 9

what is attribution

Answer 9

the action of regarding something as being caused by a person or thing

Question 10

what is proportion

Answer 10

a part, share or number considered in comparative relation to whole

Question 11

what’s the issue with univocal

Answer 11

saying words like loving and good are univocal risks falling into idolatry and anthropomorphism

Question 12

what’s the issue with equivocal

Answer 12

saying religious terms are equivocal risks not being able to say anything about God
problem of attribution

Question 13

3 premise argument against univocal/equivocal

Answer 13

p1 in order for RL to be meaningful, needs to be univocal or equivocal

p2 RL is not univocal because of the problem of anthropomorphism

p3 RL is not equivocal because of the problem of attribution

C therefore, religious argument is not meaningful

Question 14

what are the two solutions to the univocal/equivocal argument that RL is meaningless

Answer 14

Aquinas’ idea of analogy

theological ides via negative

Question 15

what does Aquinas propose

Answer 15

analogical predication, between univocal and equivocal

Question 16

analogical meaning of good and loving

Answer 16

have related meanings when used in different contexts, not exactly the same

Question 17

Aquinas’ logic for analogical

Answer 17

since God created the universe, must be some link between human attributes/predicates

because the words share a likeness, we can infer something about God due to the experience of God

Question 18

What are Aquinas’ 2 analogies

Answer 18

analogy of proportion

analogy of attribution

Question 19

what is analogy of proportion

Answer 19

we don’t know exactly what God’ love entails, only that it is upwards of ours

you can make a downwards analogy from human love to canine love

you can make an upward analogy from human love to God’s love

Question 20

what is analogy of attribution

Answer 20

allows us to assign attributes to God

if bread is good, we associate the baker with goodness - we’ve established what good is

we know what constitutes to ‘good’ in relation to mankind, we can understand what ‘good’ means in relation to their creator: God

Question 21

what is a strength of Aquinas’ idea of analogy

Answer 21

avoids problem of anthropomorphism and attribution

Question 22

what is a weakness of Aquinas’ idea of analogy

Answer 22

if we can attribute our goodness to God, can’t we attribute our badness?
human centric

Question 23

what is the via negativas view on religious language

Answer 23

religious langauage is not logical

avoids problems of anthropomorphism and attribution differently

Question 24

what is the via negativa

Answer 24

tries to say what things aren’t, rather than are

God is Not evil, not powerless etc

Question 25

strength of via negativa

Answer 25

avoids problem of anthropomorphism and attribution successfully

Question 26

what is a weakness of via negativa

Answer 26

infinite ways of not to describe God

Question 27

what does Swinburne use to demonstrate success of argument from analogy

Answer 27

wave/particle duality of light | we can describe light as both a wave and particle because it displays both characteristics

Question 28

what happens when we use wave/particle to describe light | + how does this compare to religious language

Answer 28

when we use either term, we are stretching their definitions whilst still remaining in contact with ordinary meaning similarly, we can stretch meanings of words like 'person' and 'knows' when applied to God, yet they remain in contact with their original meaning

Question 29

who builds on Aquinas' argument of analogy and how

Answer 29

Swinburne | adds to discourse of analogy by demonstrating its practical use with regard to worldly phenomena

Question 30

who put forward the idea of symbolism and why

Answer 30

Tillich symbols are in our everyday reality symbols point to a deeper level of meaning e.g. dove - peace, flag - nation

Question 31

why are symbols more elaborate than what meets the eye

Answer 31

on the surface, symbols could be an ordinary image/word, but has a deeper level of meaning not included in the dictionary definition

Question 32

why is a sign unlike a symbol

Answer 32

a sign has no intrinsic link to a deeper level of meaning, e.g. road sign

Question 33

features of symbols (5)

Answer 33

a symbol participates in the reality to which it points e.g. a national flag participates in the reality of the nation, exemplifies history, culture and identity points to something beyond themselves opens up levels of reality otherwise closed off from us can't deliberately be created might grow in meaning and then die out of usage

Question 34

who influenced Tillich

Answer 34

Otto

Question 35

what was Otto's main idea

Answer 35

main idea was of the numinous God is thought to be completely beyond rational comprehension and sensory perception

Question 36

what is God for Otto

Answer 36

God is beyond the self and is only known in a feeling if mystery and awe

Question 37

How did Otto influence Tillich

Answer 37

influence Tillich with the idea that there are levels of ourselves and reality we don't normally access, but can through symbolism

Question 38

who is against Tillich

Answer 38

Hick Macquarrie Alston Randall

Question 39

how is hick against Tillich

Answer 39

little difference between symbol and sign

Question 40

how is Macquarrie against Tillich

Answer 40

agrees with hick that there is little difference between symbol and sign 'clouds are a sign of rain', but also a symbol can't distinguish between the two

Question 41

how is Alston against Tillich

Answer 41

symbols are meaningless, we don't know whether they're true or not

Question 42

what 4 functions does Randall reduce symbols to

Answer 42

motivational - inspire people emotionally (e.g. in religion, a cross) social - common understanding of religious symbols brings people together communicational - religious symbols can express beliefs that literal language can't indicative - vision of god

Question 43

how is Randall against Tillich

Answer 43

God has no cognitive content / does't convey information he has been reduced to symbol for human values if 'god loves us' os just a symbol, it tells us nothing at all about an actual being called God just tells us how important it is that we as human beings feel loved

Question 44

weakness of Tillich

Answer 44

if religious language is purely symbolic, then it literally isn't true

Question 45

weakness of symbols

Answer 45

different religions have different symbols, which are more or less accurate? are they all meaningless as they contradict?