Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

philosophy of religion > religious language- positive and negative > Flashcards

religious language- positive and negative Flashcards

1
Q

problem of religious language

A

god beyond human understanding so how can we talk about something we dont understand

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

via negative

A

apophatic way
-argues since we cant understand god the only meaningful way to talk about god is to say what god is not

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

aquinas theory of analogy

A

cataphatic
argues that although we cant know god or say what god is we can talk about what god is like

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

tillichs symbolic approach

A

claims that religious language doesnt try to refer to god but connects our minds to god

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

what did pseudo dionyisus argue

A

since god completely beyond our understanding we cannot talk about god
-god is beyond every assertion
he can not be describes in positive ways

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

via negative way

A

apophatic way

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

purpose of via negative

A

he doesnt mean privation
saying god is darkness doesnt mean god is light
-just means we are accepting god is beyond the light/darkness distinction

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

quote from pseudo dionysius

A

there is no speaking of it nor name nor knowledge of it
-it is beyond assertion and denial

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

idea of knowing god by knowing nothing

A

trying to understand god is counterproductive because it separates us from god

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

pseudo dionysius giving example of moses

A

as he was ascending to mount sinai he was plunged into darkness of unknowing renouncing all that the mind may conceive

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

benefits of using the negative

A

helps us break free from grasping knowledge of god
causes inactivity of all knowledge to supreme being

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

link with our desire to know god and the theme of the fall

A

adam and eves disobedience and separation from god caused by their egocentric desire for knowledge

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

strength of unity from psuedo

A

unity with divine being centre of religious experience universally attested by mystics like st theresa of avila

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

whats the main strength of via negative

A

its true to gods transcendence
Otto called god wholly other
augustine comments on whether we can comprehend god or not

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

via negative in helping us understand the bible

A

it helps us understand descriptions of gods immanence
mainomdenies argues positive descriptions of god should be interpreted to be referring to gods immanence

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

via negative on gods transcendence

A

gods actual but unknowable being which can only be describes negatively

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

via negativa on gods immanence

A

gods actions in the physical world which can be describes positively
-what all biblical language about refers to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

the bible describes god in positive terms as weakness of via negative

A

god having face or walking in garden of eden- these can be seen as metaphorical
-however gospel of john- god is love, god is spirit
-positive language about god is valid

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

evaluation defending via negative

A

bible written in limited human language
must use careful intepretation
maimonides says descriptions of god in bible of his actions
augustine says they are metaphorical human expressions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

evaluation criticizing via negative

A

bible doesnt describe gods actions only but gods nature and personality
hard to interpret references to gods actions but personality easier

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

strength- maiomonides ship example

A

some knows ship exists but doesnt know what it is
-using negative attributes can help person conclude its a ship

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

brian davies criticism of maimondenies

A

negative language works when we know what possibilities for thing are
-eg- person not left handed and not ambidexterous- right handed
-god not like that
-doesnt give us further knowledge of god

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

evaluation defending via negative from brian davies

A

pseudo dionysius more succesful
-via negative works by shutting down out attempt to intelectually grasp god
-this knowledge gets in way of knowing god through unity with god

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

evaluation criticizing via negativa to brian davies

A

davies criticism success because ship example fails
-only get closer to describing what ship is if we know what ship is
-

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
strength of via negative- avoids anthpromophising
god imagined in human terms- sometimes due to religious art helps christians avoid mistaken view of god
26
weakness of via negatuve- aquinas rejection of via negativa in everyday christian menaing
-via negativa not how most people talk about god -bible not consistent with via negativa -exodus- i am your god- jealous god -analogy of attribution and proportion work better for everyday
27
evaluation defending via negative form aquinas
weakness unsuccess because pseudo- dionysius says unity with god gained once attempt to know god through reason let go -spirituality strengthened once we give up on rational conception of god -average christian wont think of language to be analogical -aquinas hasnt captured role in peoples spiritual lives
28
evaluation criticizing via negative form aquinas
aquinas analogy of peoportion and attribution things christians accept -they accept description is within human understanding
29
univocal language with why standard cataphatic way fails
attempting to say what god is by applying human concepts- words have one meaning -fails because god beyond out understanding so we cant use same word for god
30
equivocal language and why opposite approach also fails
god is loving but know loving different than saying humans are loving -fails because since we dont know what god is we dont know what loving means when applied to god- meaningless
31
what does aquinas say we are relative to god
genesis- made in likeness of god -we are like god- analagous to god
32
analogy of attribution
we can attribute qualities to creation of a thing that are analagous to those if its creation -urine of bull means bull has analagous quality of health even is we cant see bull
33
analogy of proportion
being has quality relative to its being -gods love like ours but proportionally greater
34
strength of aquinas analogy theorys basis in natural theology
human reason can gain lesser knowledge of god including gods nature by analogy -on basis of reasoning he concluded we can meaningfully talk about gods qualities by analogy
35
weakness of aquinas analogy theory basis in natural theology
-natural theology over relies on human reaosn Barth- and augustine- after fall reason corrupted by original sin -finite minds cannot grasp infinite god -after fall- reason cannot reach gods morality -only faith in gods revelation in bible valid
36
evaluation defending aquinas theory of analogy in natural theology
barths argument fails- doesnt address aquinas point out reason not always corrupted -with gods grace- reason can discover knowledge of god -analogies valid use of human reasoning to figure out what we can say about god
37
evaluation criticizing aquinas analogy in natural theology
-barth right that bad in out nature means we cannot rely in the good -humanities belief it can know anything same arrogance of adam and eve -arrogance evident in natural theology -not humble enough to rely on faith
38
strength aquinas analogy avouds problems of cataphatic by finding middle ground
univocal and equivocal language both fail -biblically supported we are made in likeness of god so theory of analogy works
39
weakness of aquinas middle ground- accuracy problem
brummer objects -says analogy of proportion works -we are saying god is not loving like humans but we cant say what way god is loving -just like via negativa -arrtibution tells us god source of human qualities but cant tell us what way god has those qualities
40
evaluation defending analogy from brummer
we might know know in what way gods qualities are like ours -we can know they they are alike -brummer misunderstands aquinas approach -we know gods qualities are like ours -not much but something so success form of via positiva
41
evaluation criticizing analogy from brummer
brummer success because analogies only meaningful if we know both things being analogised -electricity behaves like water -know what they share and dont -for god we dont have required knowledge for analogy
42
what does tillich say about how RL should be
cannot be literal as god beyond out understanding -symbolic
43
key points of RL for tillich
religious symbols out of culture and collective minds of religious tradition -makes symbols part of religion -signs point but symbols participate in what they point to
44
tillichs example of national flag
flag participates in power and dignity of a nation -seeing flag mentally connects citizen to their country
45
whats the function of religious symbol according to tillich
spiritually connect people to religious dimension of reality
46
whats the meaning of RL for tlillich
spiritual connection to god it inspired through symbolic participation in being of god
47
whats does tillich call god
ground of being -word god symbol for ground of being
48
4 elements of tillichs theory of participation
-points to something beyond itself -symbolic language participates in what it points to -symbolic unlocks deeper reality/ meaning -symbols open up dimensions of soul that correspond to levels of reality
49
main strength of tillichs theory
side steps meaning issue of our human inability to understand god -does this by suggesting RL is symbolic which points to god -participates in god -opens up spiritual levels of reality which connect to dimensions of our soul -connects humans souls to god without needing to undertand god
50
strength tilluchs theory captures spiritual side of RL
-example of crucifix when praying -most important elements of religious language spiritual feelings it evokes not cold facts
51
weakness of tillich william alston
christian doctrines like heaven and hell must be factual not symbolic -RL cant be merely symbolic -christians tend to think when using RL they express beliefs about god which can be true or false cognitivism key element of RL meaning
52
evaluation defending tillich from william
religion human impulse to something higher thats limited to us -not factual of scientific -tillichs right to refocus christianity spiritually -Rl doesnt need to be factual but needs to participate in being itself bridge souls to our own participation in it
53
evaluation criticizing tillich from wiliam
alston and hicks critique success because it shows tillich goes to far in reducing all RL to symbols -factual doctrines important for christians just as symbols are -tillich fails to approach cognitive element of religion
54
strength tillich solves problem of RL
we dont need to understand god to connect spiritually with symbols
55
weakness of tillich subjectivity and vagueness of participation
hick argues flag illustration doesnt show how participation works -not clear how religious sumbols participate in ground of being in same way as flag -reduction of and god and religion to human feelings -to vagye
56
evaluation defending tillich from hick
objection unsuccess because his theory connective to objective -when we use symbolic RL we express personal subjective faith -we also make objective faith of act through our souls connecting to spiritual levels of reality
57
evaluation criticizing tillich from hick
critique success- criticism as RE- purely subjective -personal subjective experience cannot be basis for shared intersubjective meaning in religious language
58
randalls theory of symbolic religious language
function to arouse emotion -stimulate cooperative action -comminicate aspects that cant be expressed with literal language -evoke human experience with divine
59
strength of randalls- randal more success than tillichs
-randall accepts symbols completely subjective and symbolic language is non cognitive -accepts symbols completely subjective
60
weakness of randal non -cognivitism not traditonal
-issue that non cognitive RL cannot express factual statements -some would argue religious more than human experience- about reality and RL must be cognitive
61
evaluation defending randall
non traditional doesnt mean wrong -randall part of protestant movement influenced by schleiermacher- religion about human experience and cognitive aspect secondary -influenced by existentialism -Religious meaning of and in human experience which is most important for theory of RL to capture

philosophy of religion (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions