religious language (part one) Flashcards
what are the two types of religious language?
cognitive & non-cognitive religious language
what is cognitive religious language
factual statements e.g. God exists or that Jesus rose from the dead.
what is non-cognitive religious language?
religious language that expresses feelings. Statements can’t be verified. e.g. God is love.
what did logical positivists say about religious language?
(particularly the vienna circle & A.J. Ayer) argued that religious language is meaningless since there is no evidence to prove that their statement is factual. They claim that we should rely on empirical knowledge, that could be tested with science to gain meaningful evidence about reality. Religious language cannot be tested through observation so they cannot be considered as factual knowledge.
A.j. Ayer wrote a book called what?
‘language, truth and logic’
Ayer believed that statements are meaningful if they are what?
analytical and synthetic
what does analytical mean?
analytical - a statement being true just because of its meaning
what is synthetic
needing empirical evidence to know that a statement is true.
what is the verification principle?
If a statement is neither analytic nor empirically verifiable (synthetic), the statement is meaningless
how does the verification theory link with religious language?
any religious language or claims about God cannot be verified or proved by senses. Therefore, these statements are meaningless.
How does the verification principle link with religious experiences?
religious experiences are seen to be meaningless because it cannot be proven by our senses.
quote from A.j. Ayer
‘such a reality have all been devoted to the production of nonsense’ - this means that religious statements that cannot be verified are meaningless and nonsense.
what did swinburne say about the verification principle.
1) Swinburne argued that people generally accept that ‘all ravens are black’ but there is no way to confirm that this is true, yet its still meaningful. (a critique) (theres certain statements that can be fully verified but they still have meaning to it)
another criticism of the verification principle on history, the past.
Ayer presents ‘strong verification’ (something that you can 100% verify) with our empirical knowledge but you can 100% verify anything that happened in the past but are still meaningful.
what did John Hick say about the verification principle (critique)
John hick suggests that religion language is not meaningless because the truth can be verified in the afterlife. He comes up with the parable of the celestial city to describe that when someone reaches the end of life they can verify the truthfulness of the afterlife.
what was Anthony Flew’s article called?
‘theology and flasification’
what did Flew’s falsification principle mean?
it says that for a statement to be meaningful, there should be some way to prove it false. If nothing can prove a statement wrong, then it is not saying anything meaningful
whos parable did Flew use to explain his argument and what was the parable called
parable of the garderner - John WIsdom.
what is the parable about?
how a sceptic and a believer have different views about the existence of a gardener in the jungle. The gardener can’t be found when using the five senses so the sceptic just comes to the conclusion that maybe this gardener just doesn’t exist.
how does the parable of the gardener link to religious beliefs about God?
Religious believers also have an answer when people falsify God. If nothing can disapprove of his existence then the statements are meaningless. (christians keep trying to justify people that falsify God so it makes religious statements mean nothing)
Anthony Flew said that ‘their belief in God dies a death by a thousand qualifications’ what does this mean?
It means that how believers respond to challenges against their beliefs and keep modifying their beliefs to protect them from being proven false. The original belief in God is lost due to believers continuously modifying their beliefs to protect them from being proven false. ( in short, when believers are challenged, they modify the way they talk about God. They end up changing their statement so much it no longer resembles the original claim) (for example they say that God’s love is mysterious)
what did R.M Hare respond to flew’s falsification theory.
Hare says that we all have bilks, which means that we all have a personal perspective on the world. He came up with the parable of a lunatic to describe how he has his won bilk that there are people that want to kill him. His belief can be proven wrong and influences the way he behaves so that means it does have meaning. Just like, religious statements are bilks because they influence the way people behave causing it to be meaningful.
what did Basil Mitchell say in response to Flew’s beliefs?
He said that religious beliefs are like trusting and believing in things even when the evidence is lacking. He uses a story about a partisan that is about a fighter who trusts a stranger even though he has doubts. This shows that that sometimes it is necessary to have faith even when things are uncertain. Just like the partisan trusting a stranger people can keep their faith in God even when they have doubts or when things are difficult.
what did Tillich say about the falsification principle? (cirtque)
religious statements are smbolic and they can’t be verifiable or falsifable but they can still be meaningful.
what is wittgenstein language games theory?
he said that language can be meaningful and can be used as a game. Language is like play different games, where the meaning of words changes based on the context.
