Religious Language Flashcards
what is the verification principle
establish the meaningfulness of language generally
what do logical positivists say about verification principle - 3
- language is meaningless without empirical evidence.
- conclude impossible to speak meaningfully about God - can’t be verified
- religious language is used to consider things beyond human experience
who made verification
A J Ayer
what is the argument
non cognitive meaningless
religious language not possible to prove a statement true or false
what are the 2 requirements to make a language meaningful - verification
- analytic or a priori - true by definition
- synthetic or a posteriori - empirically verifiable
what are the 2 definitions on how to language is shown to be flawed or redefined
what does pseudo proposition
- verification in practise
- verification in principle
anything other than these statements
what is a problem with verification principle
- principle can’t be verified using the principle so meaningless
- most people accept all kinds of statements as meaningful not just scientific or analytic statements
what is falsification principle
language is meaningful that can prove against it
who applied it
Antony Flew
what did he conclude
give an example
and his key quote
religious statements are meaningless as believers won’t allow anything to count against it
God is good
die the death by a thousand qualifications
how is John wisdoms parable applied to falsification.
parable of gardener - 2 people presented with same evidence - person who believers there is a Gardner will not allow evidence to count against it
how does the falsification principle differ from verification
- depends on falsification to decide if statement is meaningful
what is problem with falsification principle
people won’t allow anything to count against it.
what are challenges of falsification
flew is wrong - some give up faith due to evil and suffering
2. some say statements should not be cognitive - principle is rejected
Richard Swinburne Toy Cupboard
toys come out at night move nobody watching
can’t falsify no way collecting evidence still understand toys doing this so meaningful
Mitchells parable of stinger
stranger tells fighter working undercover fighter never believes stranger despite conflicting evidence, fighter won’t falsify his beliefs
how did anyone flew change his mind
- converted to theism
if he is a theist he must believe language is meaningful undermine earlier position
Inherent Problem
all language formed by our experiences
as God is described as being outside of our time hard to know if we can describe him
finite language can’t describe an infinite God. Can’t experience in empirical terms
many conclude if there is God can’t know it can’t speak meaningfully
Twentieth century thinking about religious language
- New emphasis on empiricism
- Wittgenstein - language only meaningful if it relates to scientific fact and empirical reality.
strengths to logical positivism -2
- Some agree with flew - when religious believers never give up there claims
- some religious events defy logic - resurrection, virgin birth
logical positivists say that events have to pass certain tests before considered meaningful. these two events fail so meaningless
weakness of logical positivism
- principle fail own tests
- some religious statements are historical, Jesus preformed miracles
- analogy, symbol and language yes successful and deafest challenge
who created symbol
Paul tillich - 20 th century
what is a sign
precise, specific, recongnised, Clear in communicating what stand for
what is a symbol
representative of something else, meaningful
point to a reality beyond them - self transcending, speak to believers
God and symbolic language - 3
- middle way through univocalism and equivocalism
- affaim something of divine human lang inadequate describing God
3, More accessible
Strengths symbol -2
- avoids anthropomorphism
- certain symbols are timeless
weakness symbol - 3
- people want certainty - literal
- symbols may provoke different emotions
- symbols change over time
who created analogy
Aquinas 13th century
definition of analogy
comparison made to show similarity between two subjects
what are two forms of analogy
analogy pf attribution and analogy of proportionality
analogy of attribution
as a creator and cause of everything God is the source of attribution such as goodness, wisdom, love
analogy of proportionality
refers to quality something possess in portion to kind of reality it possess
meaningful to say that God is faithful - we know what that means God is promotionally greater than humans his faithfulness goes above and beyond our expressions
strengths of analogy -2
- offers middle way speaking about God
- makes language cognitive as observable
weaknesses of analogy - 2
- Vienna circle - we need to know what we mean by God
- analogy only works if assumes god is there
what type of language is Via Negative
Apophatic
what was the name given to the 5th century mystic via negative
pseudo Dionysius the Areopagite
what was 5th century mystic argument - via negative
phrases like God is good as we don’t know what stands for
but he allows for kataphic language on God like king of kings
use both kataphatic and apophayoc langanhue
strength of via negative - 1
- avoids anthropomorphism maintains a sense of Gods transcendence
weakness of via negative - 1
- most theists want cataphatic language
who created language games
Wittgenstein
what was Wittgenstein quote about religious language
‘nonsense but important nonscense’
how did Wittgenstein change his mind
he said If something is nonfactual it is nonsense to say that it fails to express fact
how does Wittgenstein link it to games
what is it
can’t know the rules to all ball games language uses different rules. language is learned from others
should ask others what they mean by God
non cognitive but meaningful due to context and use
what is strength to language games-1
- statements express belief in rather than belief that
what is weakness to language game
we can watch games and watch through observation should be possible to understand religious language without being religious
who created eschatological verification
Hick
what is eschatological verification
truth of religious language is verifiable in principle meets conditions of verifcationism
what is the analogy for eschatological verification
celestial city - 2 travellers journey along road of life to city. one believes city at end other does not one belief will be verified at end of journey same way when we die truth of Gods existence can be verified
God exists is cognitive and meaningful as other religious statements
strength eschatological verification -1
heaven real possibility
weakness eschatological verification -1
doesn’t mean its true or even strong probability. athesists dismiss parable
who created religious language as Blick
hare
what is a blick
a way people see world and speak of it which is not falsifiable but meaningful to them
parable of paranoid student - blick
someone was going to kill him but nobody could prove others meaningful to him
what does hare conclude
religious believers not intending make cognitive factual claims still have meaning influence way people look at world
non cognitive but still meaningful
statements have impact on people
what is strength to blick - 1
allows belief to be meaningful even tho non cognitive
weakness blick -1
shows personal belief may not be falsifiable whilst being entirely meaningful to that person
