response to challenge of verification & falsification principle

Question 1

what does john hick claim?

Answer 1

no evidence - fact one believes influences their approach, it influences everything and is meaningful and remains so whether it is true or fase

Question 2

parable of celestial city

Answer 2

celestial city is heaven
both people are on a journey after death
their faith (or lack of)influence their attitude
the trials it mentions are issues in life

Question 3

strength of Hick’s argument

Answer 3

• Hick’s claim that celestial city/heaven is a real possibility seems undeniable as the statement ‘there is life after death’ must be either true or false
• Hick’s claim shows that taken as a whole, Christian truth claims are cognitive/factual as if we do wake up in a resurrected body, then not only will we know that Christian claims on life after death are true and that Christian claims about how God wants us to behave are also true

Question 4

weakness of hick’s argument

Answer 4

• hick writes in pov of believer for who celestial city will be reached. from pov of athiests focusing on extent of evil the possibility of a celestial city being verified is so remote to not even be considered -> if believer and non-believer interpret in diff ways then Hick’s argument is no stronger than an athiests
  COUNTER : Hick points out a body of evidence of life after death -> near death experiences give support for possibility of continued consciousness
• Hick’s argument that religious claims are verifiable eschatologically isn’t a normal factual claim. Hick admits that if Christian religious claims about bodily resurrection are true, then they’d be verified when you ‘wake up’ to bodily experience after death but if false it can never be falsified. therefore seems Hick can’t show that ‘there is life after death’ is a normal factual claim subject to falsification as there’s no continuing experience after death

Question 5

Hare’s parable of the lunatic

Answer 5

• lunatic is deluded
• no behavious by which dons can show him that he is wrong about them - will allow nothing
• dons may look friendly but is a mask -> this isa blik

Question 6

Flew religious statements

Answer 6

• are assertions on world so intended to be cognitive/factual
• religious believers allow nothing to count against their assertions so religious statements are non-falsifiable & therefore meaningless

Question 7

Hare religious statements

Answer 7

• religious statements are bliks. a blik is an interpretation of the world so religious bliks are non-cognitive
• religious bliks are non-falsifiable since they’re non-cognitive but remain deeply meaningful

Question 8

strength of Hare’s theory of bliks

Answer 8

• Hare’s position explains why people aren’t convinced by evidence that appears to contradict their deeply held beliefs
• hare’s argument that religious people see the world in a particular way seems to be true. within this perspective, religious people see God at work in the world in a variety of ways (nature). Hare’s view correctly reflects the idea that religion gives a view/attitude that is used to interpret whole of life

Question 9

weakness of Hare’s theory of bliks

Answer 9

• ‘there is a God’ is a factual claim, not a non-cognitive one. it is verifiable in principle by the existence/qualities of universe and is falsifiable in principle due to problem of evil
• if there are no factual truths about Christianity its value reduces to its psychological and sociological benefits