Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philosophy - MS > Religious Language > Flashcards

Religious Language Flashcards

1
Q

What are the key issues in the topic?

A
  • How can finite language describe an infinite God?
  • How can words accurately describe God?
  • Words can be used univocally eg) a good God and a good dog but this anthropomorphizes God
  • Words can be used equivocally but this doesn’t tell us anything about God
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What does univocally mean?

A

The word has the same meaning at all times eg) boy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the cataphatic way / via positiva?

A

Using postive language to describe God’s attributes Eg) God is loving, powerful, just, wise etc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What do believers of the via postiva / cataphatic way believe?

A

God has revealed himself through scripture, religious experience, sacraments, and creation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What scholars are in the way of the Via positiva / cataphatic way?

A

St Francis, Aquinas, Loyola

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the via negativa / apophatic way?

A

Argues we cannot say anything postive about God because we cannot comprehend him so we must say what God is not

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What did Psuedo-Dionysius say?

A

God is “beyond assertion”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What did Gregory of Nyssa say?

A

Spiritual life is a “mysticism of darkness” and at a point, a believer enters into the apophatic way of God’s ineffable and transcendent reality where God is beyond words and images.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What did Meister Eckhart say?

A

We must find “light in the darkness” and true enlightenment only comes when we leave human language behind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What did Moses Maimonides say?

A

“All we understand is the fact that He exists, that He is a being to who none of his creatures is similar” - he uses the example of describing a ship using only negative terms.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

How did Brian Davies criticise Maimonides?

A

He said that his example could easily be describing a wardrobe - leaves us with a limited understanding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are the strengths/weaknesses of the apophatic way / via negativa?

A

-Brian Davies said Maimonides’ example could easily be describing a wardrobe
- leaves us with a limited understanding
- Not how religious believers talk about God want positive assertions
- To strip God of description cuts existing ties eg) the bible
- To say what God is not implies the positives
+ prevents anthropomorphizing God, is more respectful and keeps God transcendent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Who are the scholars in the way of the Via negativa / the apophatic way?

A
  • Moses Maimonides
  • Meister Eckhart
  • Gregory of Nyssa
  • Pseudo-Dionysius
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Who states the best way to talk about God is through analogy?

A

Aquinas

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What are Aquinas’ two types of analogy?

A
  • The analogy of proportion- God’s attributes are much greater than ours Eg) 5-year-old pianist is good but cannot be compared with a concert pianist + Baron Von Hugel’s eg of a faithful dog being different to a faithful human
  • The analogy of attribution - looking at creation to attribute it to God’s attributes Eg) a bull’s urine indicates if it’s healthy

-

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the strengths/weaknesses of analogy?

A

+ Hick - language allows us to make statements about God whilst retaining his mystery
+ John McQuarrie - “reassurance our talk isn’t empty”
+ Ramsey’s discourse situation - suggests analogy is like drawing polygons that eventually make up a circle and this allows us to see the bigger picture
+ Ramsey’s model and Qualifiers - suggests another way to use analogy is to add “most”, “best”, “supreme” and this is using language differently
+ avoids anthropomorphising God

  • Don Scotus - analogy is too vague
  • Assumes there are similarities between God and man
  • Hick - the incarnation shows us about God so analogy is not needed
  • Karl Barth - knowledge through revelation - completely against natural theology so the analogy is not a way of knowing God
17
Q

Who uses symbolic language to talk about God?

A

Paul Tillich

18
Q

What is the difference between a sign and a symbol?

A

A sign is something that points to something outside it’s self and a symbol participates in which it points to Eg) the American flag which connotes power and dignity or a piece of music or art

19
Q

What was Tillich’s quote?

A

“A symbol unlocks something within our soul and expresses something about the ultimate.”

20
Q

Why is religious language a symbol for Tillich?

A

As there religious symbols such as wine, bread the cross etc but also statements such as “God is good” participates in the ground of being (the reality of God). For Tillich the ground of being is the only non symbolic statement about God that can be made.

21
Q

What are the strengths/weaknesses of symbolic language?

A
  • Hick questions what it means to participate in something
  • symbols can be interpreted differently
    -Randall says symbols are non-cognitive and have no objective reality
    + doesn’t anthropomorphize God
22
Q

What is cognitive language?

A

A statement that is subject to being true or false

23
Q

What is non-cognitive language?

A

A statement that is not subject to being true or false and is emotive language Eg) boo or hurray

24
Q

Who came up with the verification principle?

A

The logical positivists/ Vienna circle

25
Q

What is the strong verification principle?

A

A statement is only meaningful if it can be verified by an actual experience or a tautology.

26
Q

What doesn’t meet the strong verification principle?

A

Religious language as it is not verified by experience or a tautology. Therefore it is meaningless and discussion of God should be avoided.

27
Q

What strengths/weaknesses of the strong verification principle?

A
  • it is too rigid as it does not allow for any statements about history
  • scientific laws become meaningless eg) can’t test gravity is everywhere
  • Swinburne argued universal statements can’t be verified eg) all ravens are black
  • statements about art are opinions and therefore meaningless
    + would have been supported by empiricist Hume
28
Q

Who adopted the weak verification principle?

A

AJ Ayer

29
Q

What is the weak verification principle?

A

For a statement to be meaningful it has to be a tautology or can be verified in principle which enables us to make statements about the past including statements about Jesus and the future of science. However, religion and art are still meaningless.

30
Q

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the weak verification principle?

A
  • The verification principle itself can’t be verified as it isn’t a tautology and no experience can verify that empiricism is the only way to gain knowledge.
  • Swinburne used an example of toys coming to a life at night and hiding before anyone sees them - some things are true even if we can’t verify them
  • John Hick suggested the principle of Eschatological verification using the example of 2 travellers on a road arguing whether it leads to the celestial city - they will only know the answer when they get to the end of the road - just as with God - therefore religious statements can be verified in principle and are meaningful
  • There is an assumption that only scientific statements are meaningful but DZ Phillips says that art and poetry should be in a different category
31
Q

Who thought that all language is part of their own language games?

A

Wittgenstein

32
Q

What did Wittgenstein say about language?

A

Words only have specific meanings inside their own language games or forms of life so you can’t get outside a language game and ask a word’s real meaning. Therefore there can be no judgement if one language game is better than another and cognitive/non-cognitive language goes out the window although inside a language game something can be cognitive/ non-cognitive)

33
Q

What are the strengths/weaknesses of language games?

A

+ Don Cupitt supported saying there is no objective reality of God and he only exists within a community of faith.

+ DZ Phillips agreed arguing a philosophers task is not to comment on the truth of religious statements but to clarify their meaning.

-Peter Geach argues language games are circular - the word takes meaning from the game but the game takes meaning from the words in it.

+ religious and scientific statements are correctly distinguished

  • Beliefs we have are groundless and only have meaning inside games - believers won’t like this
  • can’t debate between games which are important

Philosophy - MS (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions