RL: HARE & MITCHELL Flashcards
What did Hare argue that religious language should be seen as expressions of?
What he called ‘Bilks’.
Why did Hare create the term ‘bilk’?
Because no word existed that encapsulated what he wanted to say.
What do we use our ‘bilks’ for?
To identify unfalsifiable ways of framing and understanding our experiences which help us to find meaning in the world.
What does Hare state about the belief that everything happens by chance?
This belief is just as much a ‘bilk’ as the belief that things happen according to the will of God or that everything is ‘meant to be’.
What do other thinkers gather from Hare’s assertions?
Other thinkers did take up the possibility that religious language is unfalsifiable as a way of defending religious language.
What did Mitchell develop?
The Parable of the Partisan.
What is the idea of Mitchell’s parable?
A country is occupied by the enemy during war and the ‘partisan’ is a resistance fighter. The Partisan makes a commitment to trust the stranger.
What does the partisan do about this commitment of trust in Mitchell’s parable?
Continues with this commitment even when faced with counter-evidence, he admits he sometimes doubts his decision to trust the stranger but tells himself there is reasonable explanations.
How is Mitchell’s belief different from Hare’s?
Mitchell is arguing that religious beliefs, statements and commitments do not have factual content. The partisan in the parable makes the decision to trust based on incomplete, ambiguous evidence.
How does Mitchell differ from Hare in terms of ‘bilks’ and trust?
Hare claimed our ‘bilks’ are groundless whereas, for Mitchell, the partisan’s trust in the stranger is not groundless.
