Religious Language 2

Question 1

What is the definition of the verification principle?

Answer 1

The belief that statements are only meaningful if they can be verified by the senses. There are strong and weak forms of the principle generally associated with the Vienna Circle and A.J Ayer

Question 2

What is the definition of metaphysics?

Answer 2

The branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of reality, literally things ‘beyond’ or ‘after’ the physical realm

Question 3

What is the definition of tautology?

Answer 3

A phrase where the same thing is said twice in different words, e.g. the 3 sided triangle

Question 4

What 2 ideas was the verification principle influenced by?

Answer 4

1. Empiricism. Thinkers, such as David Hume, suggested 2 areas of knowledge: a priori knowledge (which he calls relation of ideas) and a posteriori knowledge (which he calls matters of fact). Hume rejects metaphysics including discussion of God as it can be neither of the above
2. Focus on language. Ludwig Wittgenstein famously said that ‘philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday’ and ‘whereof one cannot speak, one must remain silent’. These quotes (although misunderstood by the verificationists) suggested that focusing on language would provide a way forward for philosophers

Question 5

Who was he Vienna circle?

Answer 5

-The Vienna circle was a group of philosophers who met in the 1920s and 1930s.
-They argued that some statements were meaningful and others were not. In order to identify the difference, they came up with the verification principle. This stated that a statement is only meaningful if it is able to be verified by an actual experience.
-This means that scientific claims about the world are meaningful, but religious and ethical claims are not
-However as well as religious and ethical statements, this form of the verification principle seems to rule out discussion of a number of areas that cannot be verified
-These include historical statements, discussion of scientific laws, and claims about art or beauty

Question 6

What was Ayer’s verificationism?

Answer 6

-Ayer accepted the basic idea behind the verification principle. He agreed with Hume and the Vienna circle that metaphysics should be rejected. Ayer argues that for a statement to be meaningful it must be either a tautology, something that is true by definition or something that is verifiable in principle
-It is the verifiable in principle that distinguishes Ayer from the Vienna circle. We are not required to conclusively prove something by direct observation. We merely have to be able to say how it would be possible to verify it
-Ayer uses the example ‘there are mountains on the far side of the moon’, which at the time of his writing could not be conclusively verified
-Nevertheless, it is a meaningful statement as if we were to orbit the moon we would be able to verify this claim

Question 7

How could we support Ayer’s verification principle?

Answer 7

-Ayer can be seen as offering a significant improvement on the very limited verification principle given by the Vienna circle. This widens what is meaningful to discussions of historical claims and scientific laws
-Some philosophers argue that religious and ethical claims are rightly excluded as they are different to other types of statements
-Ayer also softens the demand for absolute verification of a statement. A statement may not be completely provable, but can be accepted if it could be shown beyond reasonable doubt. This is known as weak verification

Question 8

How could we challenge the verification principle and it’s conclusions on religion?

Answer 8

-The stronger form of verification put forward by the Vienna circle has been criticised as too rigid. It seems absurd that claims about julius Caesar coming to Britain might be classed as meaningless
-It seems that there is agreement in ethics over what is good and to some extent there is agreement by artists regarding what is or isn’t beautiful. It is not apparent that ethics and art are meaningless
-Ayer is not right to rule out all religious statements. Swinburne has noted that some religious claims, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus, would be verifiable if true
-The verification principle fails its own test. It is self refuting. The claim that ‘statements are only meaningful if they are tautology nor verifiable in principle itself! Ayer responded to this challenge by suggesting that the verification principle is not a statement but a theory. As such it does not need to pass the test

Question 9

What does Hick say about the verification principle and what is eschatological verification?

Answer 9

-One famous challenge to Ayer’s rejection of religious statements comes from John Hick. Hick supports the verification principle but argues that religious claims are verifiable.
-He uses a parable of 2 travellers on a road to support this claim. The travellers argue about whether the road leads to the celestial city or whether that road just ends
-When they turn the final corner of the road and and the celestial city is there, one of them will be proved right
-Hick is arguing that religious statements are meaningful eschatological. At the end of all things, it will be possible to verify God’s existence

Question 10

What is the definition of cognitive?

Answer 10

Statements about God that can be known to be either true or false

Question 11

What is the definition of non cognitive?

Answer 11

Statements about God are not subject to truth or falsity

Question 12

What is the definition of logical positivism?

Answer 12

A movement in philosophy that believed that the aim of philosophers should be to analyse language, particularly the language of science

Question 13

What is the falsification symposium?

Answer 13

-The falsification synposium refers to a series of articles written in the 1950s, which included and responded to Antony Flew’s initial presentation of falsification

Question 14

What is the definition of falsification?

Answer 14

The principle that a statement is a genuine scientific assertion if it it is possible to say how it could be disproved empirically

Question 15

What is the scientific background of the falsification symposium?

Answer 15

-The philosopher Karl Popper devised the falsification theory as a test for what is science and what is merely pseudo science. Popper argues that when scientists make a claim, they invite others to test their hypothesis to see if it can be disproved
-Whether I claim that water boils at 100 degrees or whether I claim that it turns into jam at -10 degrees, either way those claims are testable and if they were false you could show them to be false
-Popper uses this to criticise Freud’s psychology. Theories such as the Oedipus complex are not falsifiable. Popper’s point is that if it cannot be subject to tests that would show how it could be false, then this is not a real scientific theory. It is just pseudo science

Question 16

What happens with Flew and the garden?

Answer 16

-The philosopher Antony Flew applied the falsification symposium to the use of religious language. The problem with religious language is that it cannot be falsified and it is this consideration that means that religious statements are not statements at all
-He illustrates this with a story adapted from John Wisdom of 2 explorers finding what seems to be a garden. One explorer believes that there is a gardener, the other does not
-As they wait and watch, set up trio wires and use dogs to sniff out the gardener, no gardener is found
-The ‘believer’ continues to argue that the gardener exists but the story has now changed: he must be an invisible, intangible gardener who works in secret

Question 17

What are Flew’s conclusions about religious language?

Answer 17

-Religious claims about the world aren’t really claims at all as they cannot be tested.
-When challenged, the believer waters down their claim. They shift the goalposts so much that they are not saying anything at all. Flew states that religious claims suffer ‘the death of a thousand qualifications’
-To illustrate this, consider the problem of evil. When a believer is challenged over the claim that ‘God loves people’ it reduces to ‘God loves people but allows free will, develops character, does not intervene, has a bigger plan, and moves in mysterious ways’.
-Flew would ask how this would differ from there being no God at all. What would have to happen in order for God to be disproved

Question 18

What parable does R.M Hare use to respond to Flew?

Answer 18

A lunatic is convinced that all the dons (professors) at the university want to kill him. His friends arrange for him to meet the kindest dons they can find. However, this lunatic replies that this just shows how cunning the dons are; they are trying to lull him into a false sense of security

Question 19

What is Hare’s point from his parable in response to Flew?

Answer 19

-Hare is trying to defend religious belief on the grounds that Flew misunderstands the language involved. Flew is wrong to apply scientific criteria to theolgical language
-Hare argued that we all have basic beliefs that he calls ‘bliks’. Some bliks are reasonable but others are not. Religious belief is a blik and as such it cannot be empirically tested

Question 20

What is the discussion from Hare’s response to Flew?

Answer 20

-Hare is influenced by Wittgenstein’s language games. If hare is not right that religious belief is not scientific, then this allows religious statements to have meaning to the individual; the challenge Flew makes fails
-This may seem inadequate as believers claiming that ‘God loves us’ are not just claiming a subjective truth; they believe themselves to be making a claim about reality as a whole

Question 21

What parable does Basil Mitchell use in response to Flew’s argument?

Answer 21

In a war torn country, a partisan (resistance fighter) meets a stranger who persuades him that he is the secret commander of the resistance despite sometimes working undercover. Afterwards the stranger sometimes helps, but is also often seen in the uniform of the opposition handing over resistance fighters. When challenged, the partisan says, ‘The stranger knows best’

Question 22

What is Mitchell’s point in his parable in response to Flew?

Answer 22

Mitchell partly accepts Flew’s point. He suggests that there is evidence that counts for and against belief: the believer recognises that the problem of evil is a problem. However, the believer does not allow the evidence to decisively count against belief. This is because he/she is not a detached observer but is committed by faith to trust in God

Question 23

What is the discussion after Mitchell’s response to Flew?

Answer 23

-Mitchell recognises the role of evidence in a way that hare does not. If the believer is like Hare’s lunatic, then evidence is irrelevant. Mitchell rejects the idea that religious beliefs are bliks
-Mitchell supports Flew’s idea that religious statements are assertions or claims but, unlike Flew, sees a genuine role for faith

Question 24

What are other views on falsification?

Answer 24

-John Hick prefers verification to falsification as a test of religious statements. He notes that the 2 ideas, verification and falsification, are not opposites. If religious belief is true, it can be verified eschatologically, yet if it is false it cannot be shown to be false. Hence verification is a better test
-Richard Swinburne has also questioned whether verification or falsification is the correct test for religious statements. He uses an illustration of toys in the cupboard coming alive at night when no one is watching them. Although it is an unverifiable and unfalsifiable statement, it is meaningful as we can understand the claim it makes. However, critics accuse Swinburne of oversimplifying the issue

Question 25

What does Wittgenstein say on language?

Answer 25

-Wittgenstein’s approach to philosophy and language can best be seen in the 3 short quotes below:
-‘Philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday’
-Many of the problems that philosophers have wrestled with have been caused by a failure to pay attention to language
-‘What is your aim in philosophy? To show the fly the way out of the fly bottle’
-If philosophical problems are caused by a lack of attention to language and this traps philosophers- then the aim of philosophy has to be to focus on language in order to solve these problems
-‘Don’t ask for the meaning, ask for the use’
-Wittgenstein notes that the meanings of words are not rigid and fixed. What is more important is how a word is used. The meaning of a word is really it’s use. This use of language helps to create our perspective of the world

Question 26

What are language games and religious language?

Answer 26

-Wittgenstein argues that language use is like playing a game with rules. Within our groups, we have agreed rules about how words are used. If we were to point at a chair and say the word ‘hamster’ then the person we are speaking to would correct us just like someone would do if we moved a chess piece incorrectly
-Wittgenstein observes that religious language and the language of different religious groups is in itself a language game. If we were to say that ‘God allows suffering to develop our character and we will be rewarded in heaven’, we cannot say that the statement is true in a literal sense but it digs with a Christian interpretation of the world
-It is not a statement that fits within the atheistic or Hindu language games, for instance. To suggest that the best explanation of evil is that God does not exist would not fit within the rules of the game
-It would be rather like a swimmer choosing to use a boat in an Olympic race. It is not within the rules of the game

Question 27

What does Wittgenstein say is true?

Answer 27

-Essentially Wittgenstein argues that for the religious statement, there is not a difference of opinion where one viewpoint is right and one is wrong, there are actually 2 different ways of seeing
-One way of thinking about this is the famous duck-rabbit illustration. The person who claims it is a duck and the person who claims it is a rabbit see the illustration differently
-This leaves the question of the truth of religious language unresolved in terms of verifying or falsifying what is said. It also broadens the debate.
-Religious statements are meaningful to those within the group despite the fact that the statements are not cognitive

Question 28

What are strengths of Wittgenstein’s theory?

Answer 28

-Wittgenstein recognises that religious and scientific statements are 2 different types of things that deserve to be treated differently
-The theory recognised that meaning is not fixed but changes with use and context
-It recognises that there are beliefs that we have that are groundless. We cannot necessarily provide reasons for them yet they shape our world

Question 29

What are the weaknesses of Wittgenstein’s theory?

Answer 29

-A believer may reject the idea that Religous statements only have meaning to the individual; they may (like Flew and Mitchell argue) see them as truth claims. They believe themselves to be making cognitive statements

Question 30

What is key area 1 that is compared between Aquinas and Wittgenstein?

Answer 30

Does a cognitive approach or a non cognitive approach present a better way of making sense of religious language?

Question 31

How would you compare key area 1?

Answer 31

-Religious believers, such as Aquinas, understand themselves to be speaking cognitively about God
-Ayer and Flew have challenged the cognitive view; Wittgenstein recognises that this is a challenge that has to be answered
-Unlike Aquinas, Wittgenstein seems to suggest that only those ‘within the game’ are able to understand religious language

Question 32

What is key area 2 that is compared within the ideas of Aquinas and Wittgenstein?

Answer 32

How does a non cognitive approach affect the interpretation of religious texts?

Question 33

How would we compare key area 2?

Answer 33

-A non cognitive approach to scripture wojld suggest that ‘Jesus rose from the dead’ is not a historical claim but is a way of seeing and understanding the world. For some Christian’s, this type of approach is a step too far and weakens key elements of Christianity
-Religious believers do interpret some texts symbolically. Few believe that the Genesis accounts of creation are literal truths. For some, the key to religious texts is not their literal truth but their function within faith communities. Wittgenstein may well have supported such a view
-Aquinas’ own view of scripture is very difficult to scholars who take a critical view of biblical texts. Aquinas sees texts cognitively; they make claims that are true in reality

Question 34

What is key area 3 that can be compared between the ideas of Aquinas and Wittgenstein?

Answer 34

How far does Aquinas’ analogical view of theological language remain valuable in philosophy?

Question 35

How would we compare key area 3?

Answer 35

-On a practical level, Aquinas’ approach is still used within Christianity and offers some insight into the nature of God without reducing God to a human level
-The discussion goes beyond language to some degree and perspectives on this question may be driven by beliefs about scripture and the relative importance of reason and revelation e.g. to what extent does the world (and hence our language) reveal truth about God?