Truth Flashcards
Verificationism?
A statement only has meaning if it is either analytic or empirically verifiable
What is the definition of Empirically Verifiable?
A statement is empirically verifiable if empirical evidence would go towards establishing that the statement is true or false
What is Falsification?
According to Karl Popper, he believed that, “ the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is it’s falsifiability”
A theory or idea shouldn’t be scientific unless it could, in principle, be proven false
Real science aims to be disproven and not confirmed
What’s Flews point about Falsification?
Flew supported Falsification
Regardless of the evidence to the contrary (suffering, logic etc.) people continue believing in God.
Conversely, regardless of the evidence in support, people continue to believe God does not exist.
This means that faith is not falsifiable since no evidence
appears to be able to prove the existence (or not) of God.
God died ‘a death by a thousand qualifications’
Believers modify their statements about God when
challenged to the extent that they no longer resemble the original claim
Flew’s parable was inspired by John Wisdom.
However, Wisdom was making a contrary point with the same story.
• Wisdom said that both viewers of the garden are making reasonable statements – both people are viewing the same thing and making statements supported (but not verified) by the facts
known.
• The problem is just that we can’t verify either statement.
• That just means the debate is beyond the normal scope of scientific
enquiry – religious language is a matter outside science.
• Therefore, the test for the meaningless of religious statements and
scientific statements is not the same.
Religious language is therefore meaningless as it is not
falsifiable.
What is John Wisdom’s response to Flew?
Flew’s parable was inspired by John Wisdom.
However, Wisdom was making a contrary point with the same story.
• Wisdom said that both viewers of the garden are making reasonable statements – both people are viewing the same thing and making statements supported (but not verified) by the facts
known.
• The problem is just that we can’t verify either statement.
• That just means the debate is beyond the normal scope of scientific
enquiry – religious language is a matter outside science.
• Therefore, the test for the meaningless of religious statements and
scientific statements is not the same.
What is Hare’s point about Falsification?
• Religious language statements are examples of ‘bliks’ – they are how individuals interpret
the world.
They are not something that is falsifiable.
• These lines up with Wisdom’s Parable of the Gardener.
If Christianity is just a blik, does this undermine its value?
• Hare thinks it matters whether your ‘blik’ is sane (as opposed to an insane blik – water
nymphs make streams run downhills”)
• Commenting on Flews’ jungle analogy he says: ‘It is because I mind very much about what
goes on in the garden in which I find myself that I am unable to share the explorer’s
detachment’
• However, we cannot decide which blik is best by observing the world.
What is Flew’s response to Hare?
Flew’s Response - Christians should not be happy to accept their beliefs as bliks because they think their beliefs correspond to reality.
Christianity is clear that it is making assertions about the real world – i.e. God created the Un
Swineburne?
- Factual statements can be falsified but existential ones cannot be.
- However, that doesn’t stop existential statements being meaningful.
- He illustrates his point with the story of toys in a cupboard… ‘the toys come out at night when no one observes them’ this is fictitious and unverifiable but still meaningful.
- He therefore rejects Popper’s and Flew’s definition of ‘meaningful’
What is transvaluation?
To reestimate the value of, especially on a basis differing from accepted standards; reappraise; reevaluate
Mary Daly?
Transvaluation involves creating a new radical lanuage entirely free from all forms of patriarchy
Returning to archaic language is means of rec-onnecting women with their ancient relationship with nature or being
Examples: crow, witch
They can become empowering terms
Daly thought that ‘the most basic chance has to take place in women - in our being and self-image’
She goes on to suggest that people should have the courage to reject the idea of God as a being and see God as a Being
God becomes something that people do rather than something they believe in
Mary Daly - God the Verb // Being?
In the masculine world, God is seen in a transcendent and hierarchical manner - He is over and above humanity.
His power is bigger, his knowledge is greater, his love is indifferent
Understanding this is impossible as well - God is beyond human understanding he is transcendent like a the CEO of company - you, the worker, barely see Him, and you have no idea what His plans are
This rejects female identity - it is entirely male-orientated
Is human freedom compatible with determinism?
-Boethius understands and agrees with the statement that what God foresees in the future must happen
Whether what happens because he sees or not is irrelevant to the situation
