Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

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

religious language- positive and negative Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Religion Crash Course 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
Q

strength of via negative- avoids anthpromophising

A

god imagined in human terms- sometimes due to religious art
helps christians avoid mistaken view of god

26
Q

weakness of via negatuve- aquinas rejection of via negativa in everyday christian menaing

A

-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
Q

evaluation defending via negative form aquinas

A

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
Q

evaluation criticizing via negative form aquinas

A

aquinas analogy of peoportion and attribution things christians accept
-they accept description is within human understanding

29
Q

univocal language with why standard cataphatic way fails

A

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
Q

equivocal language and why opposite approach also fails

A

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
Q

what does aquinas say we are relative to god

A

genesis- made in likeness of god
-we are like god- analagous to god

32
Q

analogy of attribution

A

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
Q

analogy of proportion

A

being has quality relative to its being
-gods love like ours but proportionally greater

34
Q

strength of aquinas analogy theorys basis in natural theology

A

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
Q

weakness of aquinas analogy theory basis in natural theology

A

-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
Q

evaluation defending aquinas theory of analogy in natural theology

A

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
Q

evaluation criticizing aquinas analogy in natural theology

A

-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
Q

strength aquinas analogy avouds problems of cataphatic by finding middle ground

A

univocal and equivocal language both fail
-biblically supported we are made in likeness of god so theory of analogy works

39
Q

weakness of aquinas middle ground- accuracy problem

A

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
Q

evaluation defending analogy from brummer

A

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
Q

evaluation criticizing analogy from brummer

A

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
Q

what does tillich say about how RL should be

A

cannot be literal as god beyond out understanding
-symbolic

43
Q

key points of RL for tillich

A

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
Q

tillichs example of national flag

A

flag participates in power and dignity of a nation
-seeing flag mentally connects citizen to their country

45
Q

whats the function of religious symbol according to tillich

A

spiritually connect people to religious dimension of reality

46
Q

whats the meaning of RL for tlillich

A

spiritual connection to god it inspired through symbolic participation in being of god

47
Q

whats does tillich call god

A

ground of being
-word god symbol for ground of being

48
Q

4 elements of tillichs theory of participation

A

-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
Q

main strength of tillichs theory

A

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
Q

strength tilluchs theory captures spiritual side of RL

A

-example of crucifix when praying
-most important elements of religious language spiritual feelings it evokes not cold facts

51
Q

weakness of tillich william alston

A

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
Q

evaluation defending tillich from william

A

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
Q

evaluation criticizing tillich from wiliam

A

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
Q

strength tillich solves problem of RL

A

we dont need to understand god to connect spiritually with symbols

55
Q

weakness of tillich subjectivity and vagueness of participation

A

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
Q

evaluation defending tillich from hick

A

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
Q

evaluation criticizing tillich from hick

A

critique success- criticism as RE- purely subjective
-personal subjective experience cannot be basis for shared intersubjective meaning in religious language

58
Q

randalls theory of symbolic religious language

A

function to arouse emotion
-stimulate cooperative action
-comminicate aspects that cant be expressed with literal language
-evoke human experience with divine

59
Q

strength of randalls- randal more success than tillichs

A

-randall accepts symbols completely subjective and symbolic language is non cognitive
-accepts symbols completely subjective

60
Q

weakness of randal non -cognivitism not traditonal

A

-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
Q

evaluation defending randall

A

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.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions