Religious Language 21st Century Flashcards
What is the difference between cognitive and non-cognitive?
Cognitive= factual statements
Non-cognitive= cannot be true or false because of emotions
What was Wittengientsteins early view?
Picture theory
statements are only meaningful if they can be defined or pictured in the real world
Which group of people used the picture theory to challenge religion?
Logical Postivists
What is the Language Games theory?
-Context matters
-religious statements are non cognitive but are meaningful depending on the Game.
What are three strengths of Wittegiensteins theory?
-recognizes that religious and scientific statements must be treated differently.
-meanings aren’t fixed
-recognizes they are groundless beliefs however though there is no reason they still shape our world.
What are three weaknesses of language theory?
-reject religious believer would say there truth claims.
-Circular game itself is a collection of words
-Feidism
What is the difference between Aquinas and Wittengeinstein in context?
AQUINAS= believed his audience were also Christian
W= His audience didn’t have particular faith
How did Aquinas and W beleive language should be understood?
AQUINAS= analogically
W=’form of life’
What are A and W views in accesibility?
A=accessed by anyone
W=only those ‘within the game’
Views on cognitive and non cognitive?
A=cognitive factual statmetns
Wittengienstein= non-cognitive and not assertions
What were logical positivist trying to argue with the verification principle?
Religious statements are meaningless as they cannot be checked empirically.
What did logical positivists believe the role of a philosopher was?
Analyze the logical structure of statements and if they are meaningful.
What did logical positivists believe the role of a scientist was?
Investigate meaningful statements and identify if there true or false.
What did the verification principle state?
Statements are only meaningful if there analytic and synthetic.
What are analytic statements?
-true by definition
-give info about what words mean
-true or false depending if the word means what it suggested
-e.g ‘a rug is a floor covering’
What are Synthetic statements?
-verified through experience
-e.g Rebecca is allergic to nuts
-Rebecca isn’t part of the definition its added information
-meaningful if can be tested through the five senses
Explain the Strong version of the Verification principle.
-Synthetic statements are only meaningful if they can be conclusively verified by immediate direct sense experience
What was the problem with the Strong verification principle?
-few statements pass the test
-scientific statements and laws meaningless as you cannot always verify that the laws will always apply
-Historical statements mean less as we cannot empirically see that Henry 8th had 6 wives
Who developed the Weak version of the verification principle?
Synthetic statements were meaningful if they could be verified in principle
-e.g ‘there are mountains on the far side of the moon’
space travel not possible but still meaningful as it could be proven through principle
What made the weaker version of the verification principle much better that the stronger version?
Allowed both historical and scientific statements to be meaningful as it did not require personal experience.
What was A.J Ayers view on religious statements?
He concluded that they cannot be verified in principle so were therefore meaningless.
Why did Ayers later change his mind?
Because even the impossible could be verified through principle.
Explain John Hick’s criticism of the weak verification principle.
Principle of eschatological verification
The idea that religious statements will eventually be proven by the end of time if we retain consciousness
What is another point to defend religious statements against Ayers view?
That the life of Jesus can be verified in principle via documents and records.
What are two other weaknesses of the Logical positivist / Verification principle?
-self refuting it fails its own test though A.J Ayers argues that its a theory not a statement.
-Karl Popper, Falsification if science was about proving things to be true we would make no progress at all.
Why did Kar Popper create falsification?
To distinguish between science and non science.
When can a scientific statement be said to be genuine?
Where it can be falsified (proven wrong)
What did Popper say against logical positivists?
He argued that we shouldn’t look to verify theories we should falsify them
What is one advantage of Falisification?
some statements can be conclusively falsified but not conclusively verified. e.g Giraffe
What does Karl popper have to do with Anthony Flew?
Flew applied falsification to religious language.
What type of statement does Flew believe religious beleivers make?
intend to present genuine cognitive truth claims
Why does flew say that religious believers aren’t making genuine assertions?
When applying Karl popper religious statements are unfalsifiable.
What parable did Flew create?
parable of the Gardener
What is the Parable of the Gardener supposed to show?
Religious believers don’t allow for falsification
Explain how in the parable of the gardener he does not allow falsification.
-original assertion is made about there being a gardener
-when evidence is presented he qualfies the statement saying there invisible
-after using an electric fence and bloodhounds he again qualified
-by this point there no longer making genuine assertions so make non-cognitive statements
What is Flew’s famous Quote?
‘death by a thousand qualifications’
In Flew’s essay what is his final question?
What would have to occur to disproof the love or existence of God?
What does John frame basically say about atheism?
-In the same way atheists pick holes in theists same can be done with them
-atheism is also unfalsifiable, as even when presented evidence they reject belief in God
-‘what must occur in order to disproof there is no God?’
What does John say when using his version of the Parable of the Gardener?
it’s not about empirical evidence alone its also about how we interpret the evidence using our different worldviews
Why has Flew not accurately portrayed fundamentalist christians?
Because they don’t qualify there statements they stick with the bible e.g God created humans on the 6th day 6,000 years ago though there is contradictory evidence
Why is Flew correct in how he portrayed Liberal Christians?
To a extent they do qualify there statements.
What does Flew seem to not take into account?
He doesn’t take into account religious experience.
What does R.M Hare believe religious statements should be understood as?
They are understood as non-cognitive statements-BLIKS
Why does Hare not see religious statements being unfalsifiable as a issue?
Because it is still meaningful to the individual
What did Hare intent to suggest when presenting the parable of the Lunatic student?
Even though the Lunatic students claim that ‘all dons want to kill me’ is unfalsifiable doesn’t meant it’s meaningless
Explain why Hare says Flew is mistaken to say that religious believers intend to make genuine assertions.
-mistaken to already think that religious statements can be falsified when there not scientific statements
-should be understood as BLIKS
-e.g Atlas greek titan once said to be holding the sky was seen as a factual statement due to the time in the same way View of God has evolved
Explain how Hare is arguing that Flew doesn’t take into account how our unfalsifiable worldviews effect our lives.
BLIKS give life meaning especially religious ones as we become more attached to them
What is a BLIK?
A unfalsifiable worldview which has meaning to the indivdual
Why are BLIKS immune to evidance?
Because they simply have meaning to us and we selectively ignore evidence.
What a 2 advantages of RM HARE?
-Kant we will never know the difference between right and wrong BLIKS
-John Hick pluralism blind men bliks close to the the truth but not right
What are disadvanatges of R.M Hare?
-Flew, no religious believer would regards there statements as BLIKS
-evil BLIKS exist such as racist BLIKS reinforcing stereotypes
-William James when approaching religious experiences he approaches it in a empirical detached way
What does Mitchell believe religious statements are?
Genuine assertions religious believers are working through the difficulty of maintaining it though there is contradictory belief.
What does Mitchell argue against Flew?
That it is not a matter if religious statements should be falsified but it is a matter of when they should.
What parable did Mitchell create?
The Parable of the stranger.
According to Mitchell why do religious believers have reason to believe in God?
Religious experience, prayers, teleological arguments.
What does Mitchell argue which opposes Hare’s Bliks?
-genuine religious beliefs are grounded in some kind of evidence.
-Chose to put there belief in God Just like the Partisans did with the stranger
-They suffer the ‘full force of conflict’
What are the two beliefs that Mitchell believes that religious believers are wrong to have?
-Those who dismiss contradictory beliefs entirely
-Those who simply argue that it is God’s Will
What are the three different believers?
-Provisional Hypothesis
-Article of Faith
-formulae that experience makes no difference
What is a provisional Hypothesis?
-A temporary theory
-Mitchell does believe it is wrong to treat them as scientific statements
- religious beliefs don’t disappear even after contradictory evidence.
Explain believers who regard them as a article of faith.
-There belief is grounded in reason and experience
-‘full force of conflict’
-and these impact religious believers lives
Explain the formulae which have experience but doesn’t effect it.
-Bliks fall under this
-essentially arguing that this is actually a rare case
-belief in empty beliefs
-Blind faith not engaging in contradictions
What are three strengths of Mitchell’s presentation of religious believers?
-He acknowledges the role of faith the fact that they simply place trust in God.
-More reflective than Hare who argues there simply BLIKS
-C.S Lewis ‘faith is the art of Holding onto something’
Why would Flew argue that Mitchell is wrong with the analogy he presented?
-Stranger is reasonable to trust but God isn’t
-The stranger has restrictions however this is to keep his identity a secret
-God is omnipotent so shouldn’t have any restrictions
How would John Hick’s epistemic distance counter Flew’s argument?
He would argue that the epistemic distance is the reason God must stay Hidden to create a gap in knowledge for genuine belief.
What is one other disadvantages of Mitchell?
The analogy may only work for those who have had a religious experience for example speaking in tongue is at the heart of religious experience for Christians.
