Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philosophy p2 > religious language > Flashcards

religious language Flashcards

1
Q

define cognitive views on religious language

A

-aim to literally describe how the world is
-are true or false

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

how would cognitivism defend religious language is meaningful

A

p1-scentences are meaningful if they are statements
p2-expressions of belief about the world are either true or false
p3-‘god exists’ is the claim that god exists independently in the world, reasons can be given to support this (Hick)
c-therefore ‘god exists’ is meaningful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what arguments assume a cognitive view of religious language

A

-ontological
-cosmological
-teleological
-problem of evil

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

define non-cognitive views of religious language

A

-do not aim to literally describe how the world is
-are neither true or false

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

how would non-cognitivism argue religious language is meaningful

A

p1-scentences are meaningful if they expressions of mental e.g. emotion
p2-expressions of these non-cognitive mental states are not falsifiable
p3-‘god exists’/’god is good’ are not claims but expressions of non-cognitive mental states
c-therefore ‘god exists’ is meaningful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what argues religious language is meaningless

A

-verification principle
-falsifiability
-invisible gardener

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

who comes up with verification principle

A

-A.J. Ayer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what does A.J. Ayer argue about religious language

A

religious language is meaningless because it fails the verification principle

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

define the verification principle

A

a statement only has meaning if it is either:
-an analytic truth e.g. a triangle has 3 sides
-or empirically verifiable e.g. water boils at 100c

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

how does the verification principle apply to religious language

A

-Ayer argues ‘god exists’ is not an analytic truth because ontological arguments fail to prove gods existence from definition of god
-Ayer argues religious statements are not empirically verifiable because there is no test to prove or disprove gods existence (unfalsifiable)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what does Ayers verification principle conclude about religious language

A

‘god exists’ is meaningless because it is neither an analytic truth or empirically verifiable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what’s a response to the verification principle

A

-it fails at it’s own test
-Ayers claim ‘a statement is only meaningful if it is analytic or empirically verifiable’ is neither analytic or empirically verifiable
-concludes the verification principle is meaningless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

how would Ayer respond to the verification principle being meaningless

A

its only meant as a definition of meaning not an empirical hypothesis of meaning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

define falsifiable statements

A

there must be some possible observation to prove a statement true or false
-meaningful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what’s an example of a falsifiable statement

A

water boils at 100c

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

define unfalsifiable statements

A

-there is no possible observation to disprove a statement
-meaningless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

what’s an example of an unfalsifiable statement

A

everything in the universe doubles in size every 10 seconds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

who argues religious language is unfalsifiable and thus meaningless

A

Flew

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

what is Flew’s argument

A

-invisible gardener

20
Q

what is the invisible gardener argument

A

p1-A and B find a random bit of jungle with both flowers and weeds
p2-A says a gardener maintains this bit of jungle, but B disagrees
p3-they keep watch for a gardener, but don’t see one
p4-so they set up other methods (fences, guard dogs) to detect gardener
p5-these methods fail to detect gardener
p6-A says this is because the gardener makes no sound, no smell and is intangible
p7-each time fails to detect gardener, A comes up with an explanation to maintain his claim that there is a gardener

21
Q

what does A claim about the gardener

A

-claims the gardener is unfalsifiable because there is no possible empirical test that could disprove it
-means there is no way to prove it either making it unfalsifiable and so meaningless

22
Q

how do the aspects of the jungle analogy represent god

A

-invisible gardener represents god
-flowers and weeds represent good and evil
-jungle clearing represents the world

23
Q

how does Flew’s jungle analogy apply to god

A

-‘god exists’ is meaningless
-we cant hear, see or feel god just as we cant hear, see or feel the gardener
-if there was a gardener we would see his work e.g. removing weeds
-if god existed you would expect him to remove evil

24
Q

what does flew’s jungle analogy conclude

A

‘god exists’ is meaningless just as A’s theory of the invisible gardener

25
Q

who came up with eschatological verification

A

Hick

26
Q

define eschatological verification

A

a statement that can be verified after death, or at the end of time

27
Q

how does eschatological verification apply to god

A

-even if it’s not empirically possible to prove gods existence in this life, it is still possible to prove it in the after life

28
Q

what’s an example of eschatological verification

A

-if a person dies they are resurrected and have an unambiguous experience of meeting and speaking with god
-serves as verification ‘god exists’ is both meaningful and true

29
Q

what happens if there is no after life (eschatological verification)

A

-cannot disprove/prove that god exists as such experiences would be impossible
-if no afterlife and no empirical evidence in this life to prove god exists/doesn’t exist, Ayer and Flew are correct to say god is unfalsifiable

30
Q

what does Hicks eschatological verification conclude

A

shows ‘god exists’ is verifiable and meaningful if true, but unfalsifiable and meaningless if false

31
Q

who came up with the resistance fighter argument

A

Basil Mitchell

32
Q

what does the resistance fighter argument argue

A

-in order for a statement/belief to be meaningful it must be falsifiable
-just because there are some observations to counter a belief doesn’t mean we have to withdraw from that belief.

33
Q

what’s an example of the resistant fighter argument

A

p1-you are in a war, your country has been occupied by an enemy
p2-you meet a stranger who claims to be leader of the resistance
p3-you trust this man
p4-the stranger acts ambiguously, doing things to support enemy instead of your side
p5-you continue to believe this stranger is on your side and trust he has good reasons for his actions

34
Q

how does the war example apply to god (resistance fighter)

A

-stranger represents god
-his actions represent evil

35
Q

what does the resistance fighter conclude

A

-we can accept that the existence of evil counts as evidence against the statement ‘god exists’ so it is falsifiable therefore meaningful

36
Q

define provisional hypothesis

A

abandoned as soon as the evidence goes against it

37
Q

define significant article of faith

A

accepts conflicting evidence but maintains belief and seeks explanation of it

38
Q

define vacuous formulae

A

no evidence counts against it, completely unfalsifiable

39
Q

what does Mitchell argue about provisional hypothesis (resistance fighter)

A

religious beliefs are not provisional hypothesis like scientific statements

40
Q

what does Mitchell argue about vacuous formulae (resistance fighter)

A

religious beliefs are not vacuous formulae

41
Q

what does Mitchell argue about significant article of faith (resistance fighter)

A

religious beliefs are significant articles of faith

42
Q

what is Mitchell’s overall argument (resistance fighter)

A

p1-we can accept the existence of evil as evidence against gods existence
p2-and so god exists is falsifiable
p3-and so god exists is meaningful
p4-the religious believer can accept there are evidence against the statement ‘god exists’ without withdrawing belief that the statement is true

43
Q

what does Hare argue

A

-religious statements are not things that can just be shown to be true or false
-they are part of someone’s belief about the world
-calls these beliefs bliks

44
Q

what’s an example of bliks

A

-a student thinks his uni professor is trying to kill him
-you take him to speak to a lecturer and the lecturer acts normal
-the student states that the uni professor was just pretending to be normal
-no amount of evidence will concince the student that his blik is false

45
Q

how does the uni example apply to god (hare’s blicks)

A

-bliks are meaningful to the person who holds them, despite being unfalsifiable
-god exists would be unfalsifiable to certain people but it still means something to them and affects their behaviour

46
Q

what does hare’s blik argument conclude

A

blik’s are unfalsifiable but still meaningful to the person who holds it

47
Q

is religious language meaningful (25 mark plan)

A

p1-intro
-religious language is cognitive and meaningful
define key terms
p2-argument 1
-verification principle (ayer)
p3-response 1
-verification principle is self defeating
p4-argument 2
-invisible gardener (flew)
p5-response 2
-eschatological verification (hick)
p6-argument 3
-resistance fighter (Mitchell)
p7-response 3
-bliks (hare)
p8-conclusion
-religious language is verifiable, falsifiable and meaningful

Philosophy p2 (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions