religious language Flashcards
1
Q
what were the beliefs of the vienna circle
A
- there are only two types of meaningful language: synthetic and analytic
- their thinking became known as logical positivism
2
Q
what is logical positivism and who adopted it
A
- logically necessary statements alone have meaning; metaphysical statements (which include religious statements) are literally meaningless
- A.J Ayer
3
Q
what is cognitive language
A
- language that conveys factual information: most of its statements are synthetic e.g the eiffel tower is in paris
4
Q
what is non cognitive language
A
- language that is not dependent on whether it can be shown to be empirically true.
- statements of emotions, morality, insight
5
Q
what does ayer believe about different types of language
where does his verification principle come from
A
- developed from his adoption of logical positivism
- there are two types of meaningful language
- analytic – true by definition
- synthetic - empirically verifiable
- all other statements are empty of meaning
6
Q
what is verification in practice
A
- verification in practice is only possible when statements can be conclusively established empirically
7
Q
what is verification in principle
A
- verification in principle is possible when it can be stated what observations would make the statement verifiable in practice and doing so could be possible at some point in the future
- for example the statement that there are mountains on the far side of the moon
- when ayer was writing language, truth and logic this could not be verified
- nevertheless it was possible to state what observations made it probable
8
Q
what did ayer conclude in his verification principle
A
- any statements unverifiable in practice or principle have no factual meaning
- he termed any such statement a ‘pseudo-proposition’
- this applies to statements like god exists or god is loving
- he claimed that ethical statements are simply statements of approval or disapproval
9
Q
strengths of the verification principle
A
- the principle is straightforward focusing on facts
- it allows scientific theories that cannot yet be proved empirically to be considered
10
Q
weaknesses of the verification principle
A
- it makes the assumption that science tells us everything of importance about the world. many would disagree.
- ayers criticism of religious claims is not true for all religious arguments. for example the claim that the universe is explained by a god is a reasonable hypothesis
- verification principle is meaningless,.since it is not empirically verifiable
11
Q
what did flew use to develop his falsification principle and what is the main idea
A
- karl poppers thinking
- something can be counted as scientific only if it is possible that there could be evidence to falsify it
12
Q
what did flew use to develop his falsification principle and what is the main idea
A
- karl poppers thinking
- something can be counted as scientific only if it is possible that there could be evidence to falsify it
13
Q
how does flew use the parable of the gardener to discredit religious language
A
- each test the two men carry out to find a gardener fails which ends with the one man saying how does an invisible, intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from no gardener at all
- flew uses this to show how theists do the same thing of going to any length to stop anything from counting against their faith clams
14
Q
strength of the falsification principle
A
- flew points to the approach of some believers to religious beliefs: they refuse to take any criticism
15
Q
weaknesses of the falsification principle
A
- many aspects of experience are not in the same category as scientific fact and have deep significance for humans. flews category is too rigid
- not all religious believers all nothing to falsify their claims. the problem of evil makes many question or even lose their faith
16
Q
weaknesses of the falsification principle
A
- many aspects of experience are not in the same category as scientific fact and have deep significance for humans. flews category is too rigid
- not all religious believers all nothing to falsify their claims. the problem of evil makes many question or even lose their faith
17
Q
what are the two things that hick claim for religious langauge
A
- its claims are cognitive
- they are therefore subject to verification
18
Q
what does hick conclude with his parable of the celestial city
A
- there is no evidence for whether or not the road leads to a celestial city
- their views on this dictate how they travel along it
- at the end of the journey all will be made clear
- hicks parable makes the point that there is a truth to know and that all will be revealed after death
19
Q
strengths of eschatological verification
A
- gives good supports to the view that religious claims are cognitive as if we do wake up in a resurrected body then we shall know that many other christian claims are true
- shows that heaven is a real possibility
- an atheists claim relating to life after death is similar: it could be falsified but never verified
20
Q
weaknesses of eschatological verification
A
- does not make heaven real. atheists would dismiss the parable
- it can be verified but not falsified if true because of its nature
21
Q
what is a blik
A
- a term used by hare for a fixed and unalterable view of the world that is not an assertion but is non cognitive and non falsifiable
22
Q
what does hare believe about religious langauge and bliks
A
- religious language is non cognitive
- his parable of the lunatic illustrates his claim that all beliefs are bliks
- bliks are interpretations of the world that are not falsifiable
- nevertheless they are deeply held, life changing and therefore crucial
23
Q
strengths of hares argument
A
- it explains why there are different factual claims in religion: they are bliks, not cognitive statements. this also explains why people are not convinced by evidence that challenges their view
- supports the view that religion gives a view that is used to interpret the whole of life in a range of distinctive ways
24
Q
weaknesses of hares argument
A
- makes religion very subjective as it all depends on how you see something
25
Q
what is the language game
A
- language has a meaning within a particular social context, each context being governed by rules in the same way that different games are governed by different rules
- the meaning of statement is nothing to do with verification/falsification but with the context in which it occurs. each context has its own rules
26
Q
why does wittgenstein reject the falsification and verification principle
A
- he does not view religious claims as scientific ones
- the mistake of ayer and flew is to apply the language from the language game of science and apply it to religion
- the meaning of a word derives from the context in which it is used
27
Q
what are the five key points of wittgensteins language games
A
- words do not indicate an object but perform a function
- language games are connected to a form of behaviour (a form of social behaviour)
- language is something that is learned from others
- the word god is not an object
- religious language cannot be claimed to be true or false
28
Q
what does wittgenstein mean by arguing that words do not indicate an object but perform a function
A
- it’s like playing chess, where the player needs to know the rules of the game e.g to understand how the words function in a particular context
- wittgenstein argues that we should not ask for the meaning of a word but for the use
29
Q
what does wittgenstein mean by saying language games are a form of behaviour
A
- speaking is an activity in which words gain their sense
30
Q
what does wittgenstein mean by saying the word god is not an object
A
- it is a word used in religious contexts (baptism)
- its meaning is in the context in which it is used
- instead of àsking ‘what is god’, the question should be ‘in what contexts should the word be used
- only those who belong to a religious tradition can fully understand and appreciate the emotion and aura surrounding religious statements such as ‘god loves me’
- this means that it is not a single language game, given the number of religions
31
Q
why does wittgenstein believe that religious language cannot be claimed to be true or false
A
- its meaning is defined by the user within their religious language game
32
Q
strengths of wittgensteins argument
A
- it allows a range of meaning for language rather than trying to put it in one box
- it allows for religious statements to be belief in
33
Q
weaknesses of wittgensteins argument
A
- it is virtually impossible to enter into debate with those coming from another language game e.g atheism
- this is important but most religious believers believe that religious claims are also cognitive
34
Q
what does aquinas believe about religious language
A
- starts from the view that god is spaceless and timeless and so completely different from human experience
- analogy of attribution
- analogy of proportionality
35
Q
what is Aquinas’s analogy of attribution
A
- despite gods essential difference from the universe, it is possible to say something about him
- when god created humans, he created them with the capacity for goodness, wisdom, etc
- that goodness, wisdom, etc are not identical with god’s nature, but we can say that god is good, wise etc
36
Q
what is Aquinas’s analogy of proportionality
A
- this starts from the idea that created things have qualities proportionate to their nature
- so humans have goodness, wisdom etc proportionate to their nature
- god is totally different from created things
- in saying that god is good, wise etc humans cannot know what that means for god. their goodness etc is a remote approximation to his
- gods goodness is proportional to the absolute perfection of his nature
37
Q
what is hicks example of proportionality
A
- the faithfulness of dogs compared with that of humans, which is not the same but not totally different
38
Q
what are ramseys models
A
- a term from our experience that can be applied to god e.g good
39
Q
what is a qualifier
A
- a qualifier results from the recognition of gods essential difference from us e.g the adverb infinitely
40
Q
what is a disclosure situation
A
- twofold
- the use of the model and a qualifier encourages in the person concerned an attitude of adoration and commitment
- gods corresponding disclosure means everyday experiences take on a new meaning
41
Q
strengths of using analogy to talk about god
A
- it avoids the issues caused by the use of univocal and equivocal language
- it’s use of observable experience makes the language cognitive
- it encourages the believer to push beyond the limited meaning of goodness etc that relates to everyday experience
42
Q
weaknesses of using analogys to talk about god
A
- what can be said about god is very limited, since god is essentially unknowable
- hicks analogy doesnt work because neither dog nor human contains the idea of infinity
- the same approach could be used to argue for negative language about god
43
Q
what is the via negativa
A
- the approach to religious language that describes god in terms of what he is not
44
Q
what are the two parts of the via negativa
A
- kataphatic
- apothatic
45
Q
what is kataphatic theology and language
A
- they are about making positive statements about god
- for example the statement that god is our heavenly father can be used
- the characteristics of a human father are not mirrored exactly in god but nevertheless can be meaningfully and usefully projected onto him
46
Q
what is apophatic theology and language
A
- about making statements about what god is not
- gods total otherness means that god cannot be referred to in terms that would be used of anything in the universe, including ourselves
47
Q
who is pseudo-dionysius
A
- he developed the via negativa to emphasise god as completely beyond human understanding and to ensure that no language was used that could limit him
- he was a mystic
48
Q
what did pseudo dionysius believe
A
- it cannot be said that god is good because humans dont know what this means
- god is beyond assertion and beyond denial
- he claimed that god is nameless yet at the same time has the names of everything that is. this expresses the idea of a god who is both immanent and omnipresent
49
Q
who is maimonides
A
- a jewish scholar
- supported the via negativa
50
Q
what did maimonides believe
A
- humans can know that god exists, that is all
- to use positive aspects such as power in reference to god was to limit and reduce him
- he therefore accumulated all the negative statements that can be used. to illustrate this he described the nature of a ship using only negative statements
51
Q
strengths of the via negativa
A
- it avoids making god a ‘thing’
- it avoids anthropomorphism, instead focusing on gods transcendence
- it is true to the mystical experience of god as ineffable
52
Q
weaknesses of the via negativa
A
- most people want to say positive things about god. it is difficult to worship a god referred to only negatively
- the end result of such language might not be the god of theism
53
Q
what does tillich believe about religious language
A
- religious language is symbolic
54
Q
what are the 6 points to tillichs argument
A
- signs are forms of communication, pointing to something, but symbols go deeper
- symbols can die or change their meaning, and they may not be meaningful to everyone
- god is the meaning behind all that exists
- like poetry, art and music, religious symbols ‘speak’ to a believer and arouse emotions
- as with secular symbols, religious ones do not have meaning for all believers
- symbols both affirm and negate god
55
Q
what are symbols
A
- a symbol contains in itself something of what it represents
- for example, the american flag contains in itself the sense of pride and dignity of being american
56
Q
what does tillich mean by saying god is the meaning behind all that exists
A
- he cannot be known in a personal way but only through symbols
- god is ‘being itself’ rather than a being
57
Q
how do symbols both affirm and negate god
A
- they affirm something positive about god
- they also negate that statement because human language is totally inadequate as a description of god
58
Q
strengths of using symbolic language about god
A
- it avoids the danger of anthropomorphism while allowing believers to experience a deep sense of meaning through the use of symbol
- it permits the use of one literal statement about what is meant by god without the need for metaphysical concepts
59
Q
weaknesses of using symbolic language with god
A
- symbols change over time and can even loose meaning
- symbols cannot be falsified or verified
- his argument is circular
