Religious Language Flashcards
What do cognitivists believe about religious language?
It makes truth claims about the world which are either true or false
What do non-cognitivists believe about religious language?
It is neither true nor false; it does not describe the world but serves another purpose
Who created the Verification Principle?
The Vienna Circle (weak verification added later by Ayer)
What is the Verification Principle?
A statement is meaningful if it is either analytic (true by definition) or synthetic (verifiable by observation)
What is weak verification?
Ayer’s idea that some statements which are only partially verifiable are still meaningful (e.g. there are mountains on the far side of the moon)
What text did A.J. Ayer write outlining the verification principle and weak verification?
Language, Truth, and Logic
Name a strength of the Verification Principle
It is clear and easy to follow / it allows us to accurately describe the world / it has no time for superstitious or unprovable beliefs, e.g. flat earth or racism
Name a weakness of the verification principle
It does not pass its own test - there is no way to verify the verification principle / without Ayer’s weak verification it does not allow statements about history / with Ayer’s weak verification it potentially allows religious statements too - see Hick / Wittgenstein’s Language Games could be used as a response
What is eschatological verification?
Hick’s argument that, using weak verification, religious statements are verifiable eschatologically (at the End of Days/after death)
What theory is eschatological verification a response to?
The Verification Principle/weak verification
What parable does Hick give to support eschatological verification?
The Parable of the Celestial City
What is Hick trying to show in the Parable of the Celestial City?
That while both travellers have equally valid views, only one of them will be verified in the long run
Give a strength of eschatological verification
It shows that the Verification Principle could allow religious statements, allowing meaningful religious discussion
Give a weakness of eschatological verification
It still implies that religious statements are unverifiable while we are alive, and therefore does not help us to have religious discussions
Who created the Falsification Principle?
Karl Popper
What is the falsification principle?
A theory is scientific if we know what evidence it would take to disprove it
Who applied the falsification principle to religious statements?
Antony Flew
How does Antony Flew demonstrate that religious statements are unfalsifiable?
Using the Parable of the Gardener
Who do the two explorers represent in the Parable of the Gardener?
A theist and an atheist
What does the garden represent in the Parable of the Gardener?
The world
What expression does Flew use to explain that the concept of God becomes meaningless due to the refusal to falsify it?
“The death of a thousand qualifications”
Give a strength of the Falsification Principle
It aligns with how scientific theories are actually formed (better than the Verification Principle) and allows a wider range of statements / it uses a rational argument to explain why religious statements are meaningless
Give a weakness of the falsification principle
Not all statements are scientific and using it the way Flew does risks reducing the world to a set of theories / Hare’s bliks or Wittgenstein’s language games could be used as a response
KNOW THE SPEC: What are the two main CHALLENGES to religious language?
Verification and Falsification
KNOW THE SPEC: What are the RESPONSES to the challenges to religious language?
Eschatological verification
Bliks
Language Games
What is a blik?
A belief about the world which is unfalsifiable but shapes the way a person lives their life
Who came up with the theory of bliks?
R.M. Hare
What is the theory of bliks a response to?
The challenge of falsification
Is eschatological verification a cognitive or non-cognitive defence of religious language?
Cognitive
Are bliks a cognitive or non-cognitive defence of religious language?
Non-cognitive
Are language games a cognitive or non-cognitive defence of religious language?
Non-cognitive
Give two examples of bliks from the work of R.M. Hare
The lunatic don
The steering column
What is Hare trying to illustrate with the parable of the lunatic?
While the lunatic’s belief that the dons want to kill him is unfalsifiable, it is still meaningful because it affects how he lives
Explain a strength of bliks
Bliks show that religious beliefs are compatible with the facts we hold about the world and are therefore neither rational nor irrational / bliks focus on the way religious shapes our lives, which is more important than the truth claims
Explain a weakness of bliks
If there is no way of getting rid of a blik, it still suggests that there are limits to what can be achieved in religious discussions / Hare does not explain how we tell the difference between a sane blik and an insane blik
According to Wittgenstein, where do we find the meaning of religious language?
Its use
What is a language game?
A context or form of life in which language is used, which decides its meaning
In which text would we find Wittgenstein’s theory of language games?
Philosophical Investigations
What does Wittgenstein say about the meaningfulness of religious language?
It is meaningful to those inside the game, and cannot be understood by those outside the game
What example does Wittgenstein give of a game where the rules only make sense to the players?
Chess
Is Language Games a realist or anti-realist theory of language?
Anti-realist (because you are not describing reality but the game)
Give a strength of language games
It shows why scientists and theologians struggle to resolve the question of religion / it captures how language actually evolves and is focused on real-world use
Give a weakness of language games
It does not allow discussion across religions/beliefs / it suggests that religious language does not describe reality, which many religious believers would disagree with
KNOW THE SPEC: What are the other views about the nature of religious language?
Tillich (symbol)
Aquinas (analogy)
Via Negativa
What does Paul Tillich argue about religious language?
It is symbolic and non-cognitive
According to Paul Tillich, what is the only cognitive statement which can be made about God?
He is the Ground of Being
What are the characteristics of symbols according to Tillich?
They point to something beyond
They participate in that to which they point
They open up levels of reality that are otherwise closed to us
They open up levels of the soul corresponding to those levels of reality
Give a strength of Tillich’s symbolic language
It explains why visual symbols have as much meaning for religious believers as scripture / he captures the limits of language in describing God while explaining how religion provides meaning
Give a weakness of Tillich’s symbolic language
It fails the Falsification Principle and could be argued to be “qualifying” traditional Christian beliefs / concepts like “levels of the soul” will have no meaning to those who do not share the beliefs of Christianity
What is the Via Negativa?
The Negative Way; The belief that the best way to describe God is by saying what he is NOT (e.g. not limited, not temporal)
Name a scholar associated with the Via Negativa
Moses Maimonides / Pseudo-Dionysius
What example does Maimonides give of something which can be described by saying what it is not?
A ship
Why does Maimonides argue we can only describe God using negative language?
Because none of our language is adequate to capture him - it ends up limiting him
Give a strength of the Via Negativa
It appeals to mystics who seek to become closer to God by distancing him from ordinary concepts / it resists other approaches e.g. analogy which might limit God
Give a weakness of the Via Negativa
Many things cannot be described in negative language and there is a risk that we just qualify God out of existence / some negative statements do not add to our understanding e.g. ‘God is not a wombat’
Which philosopher applies analogy to religious language?
St Thomas Aquinas
What are Aquinas’ two types of analogy?
Proportion and attribution
What is Aquinas’ analogy of proportion?
God has the same qualities as us but to a greater proportion; e.g. he is loving like a father, but to a greater degree than any human father
What is Aquinas’ analogy of attribution?
All our positive traits come from (can be attributed to) God, e.g. God is good, and we can understand this through examples of good things God has created in the world
What example does Aquinas give to explain the analogy of attribution?
The bull’s urine: we attribute the health of the urine to the health of the bull; in the same way we attribute the goodness in the world to the goodness of God
Name a strength of analogy
It reflects how religious language is actually used in scripture and by believers e.g. ‘the Lord is my shepherd’/’God the Father’ / it makes sense of God while also acknowledging that he is greater than the examples we compare him to
Name a weakness of analogy
There is a risk of anthropomorphising God (making him seem human), e.g. years of saying ‘God the Father’ has led many people to view God as male / using the analogy of attribution raises the problem of whether we also attribute the evil things in the world to God
