religious language- the apophatic way Flashcards
who?
pseudo dionysis
what does he say and how is this linked to plato?
god can only be explained in terms of what he is not, plato also stressed the transcendence of a ‘good’ that is beyond all language. p.d insists on the total ineffability of god, he is beyond all categories of thought.
3 ways to talk of RL
via negativa
state of affirmation (god is loving)
the word beyond
purpose of RL
a. move the reader beyond words and concepts by denying them
b. negative predication avoids problems of univocal language
c. insist on the utter inability of language to capture god- thus it does not describe him but brings us closer to him
what is the spiritual effect of RL
allows us to break free from our vain grasping of knowledge, we can only know god when we realise he is beyond our ability to know and we stop trying
p.d- we “know beyond the mind by knowing nothing”
this is knowledge gained through UNITY WITH GOD BY A MIND WHICH HAS RENOUNCED ITS ATTEMPT TO GRASP WHAT HE IS
problems with Via Negativa?
majority of theists Want to make positive assertions about god e.g god is love
martin luther; god has spoken to humans directly ‘no violence is to be done to the words of god… they are to be understood in their literal and grammatic sense’- if he says ‘god is good’ it is literal
is the via negative cognitive? why?
pseudo dionysis believes the via negativa has no cognitive content- it isnt making a truth claim-
what does maimodides say
negative predication will actually bring us closer to god- unlike pd. it actually has cogntive content
when we say ‘god is wise’, we are closing off certain unwanted conceptions e.g he is not foolish
he uses a method of interpretation that REFRAMES POSITIVE ATTITUDES IN A WAY THAT EMPHASISES THEIR LIMITATIONS
MAIMODENIES on biblical langiage
biblical language is limited, we should interpret it in a way that emphasises gods actions- god is a jalous god-> gods actions are jealous
how does maimodenies use the ship to explain how negative predication can be cognitive (make truth claims)
the ship= we can find put knowledge through negative information, given enough (not a plant, not flat or round) we can arrive at a ship
so we can come closer to god thro ugh careful consideration of what he is not
how does davies argue against the ship
we can easily arrive at a cupboard or coffin, it is not enough
how does ayer argue against this?
'’god” refers to nothing meaningfuland is non-cognitive
how does crombie respond to ayer
god may be mysterious and incomprehensible but it can be cognitively meaningful. if we pair gods attributes with what he is not we can gain an understanding of him
finite–> infinite
nessecary–> contingent
this is a valuable tool in mystical existence and also grasps the ineffability of god
