Religious language Flashcards
What is an analytic statement
An analytic statement the words in the statements will verify if the statement is true or false
What is an synthetic statement
A synthetic statement requires further external information to verify if it is true or false. The evidence will normally be empirical - our 5 sentence
Cognitive statements are what
Realist and univocal
What is Cognitive statements
Factual statements proven true or false vio empirical evidence
Univocal means what
word means the same when applied to God when using RL
What is realism
World exists objectively and independently of the way we think or describe it. To interpret religious statements in a realist way includes asserting these statements are either made true or false be something that exists objectively and independent of the way we think about it
What is a non-cognitive statement
Context dependent statements that cannot be verified or falsified
What is meant by non cognitive
Statements are anti-realist and equivocal
What is meant by equivocal
Saying something and meaning different - never know what is meant when applied to God
What is Non-realist / anti-realist
Religious statements are not made either true or false by anything objective
What is some example of truth claims in religious language
“There is no God but Allah” and “God created the world”
What Quotes in religious language shows people expressing feelings and emotions
“My soul glorifies the lord and my spirit rejoices in God my saviour”
What quote expands on the verification principle
“A statement which cannot be conclusively verified cannot be verified at all. It is simply devoid of any meaning”
What’s verifications how meaningful is the language used about God
Is meaningless as there is no way to show the truth or falsity of ‘God-talk’ by observation and experiments
What is Swinburne issue with verification principle
Make statements people say meaningless. Gives the example “all ravens are (at all times) black”, Highlights that whilst we generally accept ravens are black there is no way to confirm this statement, because no matter how many ravens you blook at, there many be another one which is not black. Therefore the statements cannot be verified, so is meaningless.
How can history be an issue for verification principle
no meaningful statements can be made about history. EG - battle of hasting happened in 1066 yet there is no way to empirically verify this, so the statement about the event is meaningless
Whats A J Ayer quote about verification principle
“The criterion we use to test the genuineness of apparent statements of fact is the criterion of verifiability”.
With Ayer whats important about the quote “God answers my prayer”
People do make other type of statements that are important to themselves, but such statements are not factually significant. EG [quote]. “Sentence expressing it may be emotionally significant but it is not literally significant”
For Ayer what is a statement that needed to be verified called
Putative statement
What is practical verifiability
Such statements can be tested in reality. EG “Mr smith car is red” I could observe the car and verify if the statement was true or false
verifiability in principle is what
A statement that could could be verified if we had the correct technology. “This is life on mars”
What is strong verification
Applied to anything that can be verified conclusively by observation/ experience. No doubt
What is weak verification
statements that can be shown to be a probable by experience or observation. “all humans are mortal”
After criticisms Ayer updated his statement to say what
“A statement is held to be literally meaningful if and only if (iff) it is analytic or empirically verifiable”
What is directly verifiable
A statement that is verifiable through an observation
What is indirectly verifiable
statement whose truth cannot be directly observed but could be supported by directly verifiable evidence. Also refers to analytic statements
Verification is unverifiable
You cant verify the statements “statements are only meaningful if verifiable by sense observation” with a sense observation and it is not analytic
God is talk is eschatologically verifiable. Is supported by who and what does it mean
John Hick
Truth of religion will be verifiable in principle at the end of time
What is Hicks example of the two travellers
Two travellers on the journey through life to the celestial city. One believes the city is real, the other does not. Whoever is right will be verified at the end of the journey
Evaluation of strong verification
Widely criticised as is excluded many areas of knowledge such as history, because no sense observation can confirm historical events. it also excludes any universal statement (think Swinburne and the ravens). However, Ayer did make amendments to his theory to deal with these issues.
What is the evaluation of evidence problem
what evidence should count? whilst Ayer reject religious experience other have stated that these should be accounted for
What is the evaluation of meaningful but not verifiable
statement can still have meaning without being verified. E.g. Schrodinger’s cat. You can never verify if the cat is dead or alive but there is still meaning to the idea of the cat in the box.
What was Flew quotes on falsification principle
“Now it often seems to people who are not religious as if there was no conceivable event or series of events the occurrence of which would be admitted by sophisticated religious people to be a sufficient reason for conceding ‘there wasn’t a God after all”.
What is the falsification principle
Not concerned with what may make something true, but what may, in principle, makes it false. if something could not, in principle, be falsified then it is meaningless
What is the principle of the explorers in the jungle in the falsification principle
2 explorers in the jungle come acroos a clearing with flowers and weeds. One explore concludes that a gardener must be responsible for looking after the plot but other disagrees. they wait for the gardener to appear, set up and electric fence and even use a bloodhound to track its scent. No sign of the gardener. Explorer who is convicted that the gardener exists states: Has no scent, makes no sound, secretly comes to look after the garden he loves
What does the one explore that believes in the gardener have to do with religious believers
religious believers act in the same way as the explorer who believes in the garden. wont let anything falsify their belief
How is natural disasters linked to falsification principle
religious believer may claim God loves people like a father and is omnibenevolent. Then their is natural disasters. Eg. Tsunami 2004. No help from God? Why didn’t God prevent this? Love from god is “inscrutable”. No experience will falsify a religious believers faith.
