Religious Language - 20th Century Flashcards
What was the Vienna Circle
Group of scholars in the 1920s and 30s who debated on what statements were meaningful and worth discussion
What school of thought was the Vienna Circle and what did they use
Logical Positivism and they used the strong verification principle
Tautology
A statement that is always true that holds its meaning within it, the round circle
what was the strong verification principles terms for meaning
- Could be empirically verified
- True by definition or tautology
What are the weaknesses of logical positivism
- Can’t make statements about history
- Scientific laws are meaningless
- Ignores symbolic things like poetry or art
How does Swinburne criticise logical positivism
Universal statements like all ravens are black have meaning but can’t be empirically verified
What did Aj Ayer develop
the weak verification principle
What does the verification principle deem statements about god
meaningless
What was the Weak Verification Principle
Ayer argued that statements like scientific and historical could be verified in principle because they are known to be true just not empirically provable.
What was the evident flaw in Ayers Weak verification principle
Anything could be verified in principle
How does Hick criticise Ayer in his eschatological verification
God and heaven can be verified in principle because believers will see death as a means to verify if heaven and god exists.
Hicks parable of the celestial city
two men walk down a path yet one believes it leads to a celestial city and the other believes it is pointless and leads nowhere yet neither is right or wrong
how do empirical and historical arguments in verification principle weaken it
- Jesus can be verified historically through bible
- Paleys design argument uses empiricism to prove god exists
How does DZ Phillips criticise the verification principle
- DZ Phillips says that religious language shouldn’t be treated like scientific statements but more symbolic like poetry
Explain Swinburne’s toys in the cupboard analogy
Toys in the cupboard come alive at night but return before anyone sees, this isn’t meaningless just impossible to verify empirically
What are Wittgenstein’s language games
meaning of a word depends on the context or ‘game’ it is being used in
example of wittgentsteins language game
Key could be a metal object for a door, button on a piano, symbols and their meaning on a map, depends on the context
How was Wittgenstein’s language games applied to religious language
religious language is its own game and can’t be criticised by atheists as they don’t understand the context they are in another game
What is wrong with language games
prevents discussion between games which is important to encourage thinking and developments
non cognitive
non factual statement that isn’t true or false more symbolic or emotional language
How did Cupitt develop language games to show religious language has no meaning
All language games are non cognitive as true and false have no objective meaning, The meaning depends on the wider context or form of life of the language game and so each game creates its own reality, God isn’t objectively real but within the religious language game he is a created reality.
How does Phillips use language games to show religious language does have meaning
God is a reality beyond the scope of philosophy, philosophy shouldn’t question truth of religious statements but clarify their meaning. He argues that language can be cognitive and non cognitive and both are meaningful but it depends on the context or form of life.