Religious Language (God) Flashcards
Verificationism, falsificationism, language games
What is cognitivism, also in terms of religion?
Truth apt statements that are mind independent and are supported by reasoning. ‘God exists’ is a factual statement.
What is non cognitivism, also in terms of religion?
Statements are expressions of belief. They cannot be tested by evidence. ‘God exists’ has a meaning of expression of a non cognitivist attitude.
What is Ayer’s verification principle?
Statements are only meaningful if they are analytically true or empirically verifiable. (Development of Hume’s Fork)
How is Ayer’s verification principle applied to religious language?
P1) The verification principle: all meaningful claims are either analytic or empirically verifiable.
P2)’God exists’ is not analytic
P3)’God exists’ is not empirically verifiable
C1)Therefore, ‘God exists’ is not meaningful
C2)Therefore, religious language is meaningless.
What is logical positivism?
Ayer and others believed that scientific knowledge and language is the only meaningful therefore factual knowledge. All metaphysical doctrines are meaningless. The ultimate basis of knowledge rests upon experience from observation or experiments, not personal experience. (Matters of fact and relation of ideas)
How does Hume’s Fork and the Vienna circle challenge religious language?
Religious language is non cognitivist so expressions of belief and there is no empirical evidence to base off. The bible is thousands of years old so cannot be evidence due to how many variations through translation, plus it’s not literal but allegorical. Near death experiences of the afterlife etc aren’t evidence because they’re subjective to the one person.
Explain the parable of the celestial city (Hick)
Two men travelling down a road. One believes it leads to the celestial city, the other believes to nowhere. It’s the only road and they must travel it. The journey has good times and bad times. Their opinions are completely opposite, but they will only know when they turn the last corner and one’s right one’s wrong. In life people will believe in God or won’t, and only in death in the afterlife will they know whose right.
Explain eschatological verificationism
The verification of a statement only after death in the afterlife. John Hick argues one way to verify God and religious language is in the afterlife.
Explain criticisms of Ayer’s verification
1)Ayer’s principle rules out so much of everyday topics we talk and speak about it leaves so little left. Art, poetry, our inner feelings are all meaningless leaving us with little value diminishing human thought.
2)The verification principle itself does not work alongside it’s own criterion because it doesn’t seem empirically verifiable or true by definition.
3)What we know is very little. Most of philosophy is metaphysics so it would all be meaningless.
4) In science when doing empirical investigation, we FALSIFY we don’t verify. Ayer has conflated meanings.
Explain Flew’s Parable of the invisible Gardener
Two explorers come across a clearing in a jungle. One argues someone tends the plot, the other disagrees. They watch the plot and set up traps. Nothing ever happens. The believer is still convinced and says the gardener is ‘invisible, intangible, insensible’. The sceptic questions him, asking what the difference is between a completely unsensible being and one who isn’t there.
What is Flew’s Falsificationism?
A deductive standard of evaluation of scientific theories and hypotheses. A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable if it can be logically contradicted by an empiricist.
How is falsificationism applied to religious language?
So for a claim to be meaningful, there has to be something it’s denying, a way to establish that it’s false. If ‘god exists’ is a real claim then there should be some empirical evidence to lead us to believe it’s false. If a religious believer can’t accept anything empirical to show God doesn’t exist then ‘God exists’ means nothing. They keep qualifying what it means for god to exist. GOD DIES THE DEATH OF A THOUSAND QUALIFICATIONS.
Explain strengths and weaknesses of Flew’s falsification
Strengths:
Provides clear criterion, promotes scientific progress by encouraging empirical evidence.
Weaknesses:
Problem of induction-A statement not yet falsified doesn’t mean it will be in the future. Doesn’t account for metaphysical claims that are not empirically verifiable.
Not all meaningful statements are falsifiable.
Explain the parable of the lunatic (RM Hare)
A lunatic is convinced all dons want to murder him. His friends introduce him to the nicest dons to show him they won’t do anything. But the lunatic says he was just being cunning and plotting against him. It doesn’t matter what the lunatic is shown he will react the same.
What does Hare try to argue with his parable of the lunatic?
The lunatic (religious believer) has unfalsified belief. Religious belief is being compared to paranoid belief, they’re still meaningful in some ways- they state someones state of mind and we can predict their behaviour. but meaningful belief needs to be more than falsifiable, flew is being too strict.
