Inherent Problems of Religious LanguageTheme A. Inherent problems of religious language: Limitations of language for traditional conceptions of God such as infinite and timeless; challenge to sacred texts and religious pronouncements as unintelligible; challenge that religious language is not a common shared base and experience; the differences between cognitive and non-cognitive language.
Inherent Problems of Religious Language
Inherent Problems of Religious Language
Verification PrincipleTheme B. Religious language as cognitive (traditional religious view), but meaningless (Logical Positivists' view): Logical Positivism - Verification (A. J. Ayer) – religious ethical language as meaningless; there can be no way in which we could verify the truth or falsehood of the propositions (e.g. God is good, murder is wrong); falsification nothing can counter the belief (Antony Flew). Criticisms of verification: the verification principle cannot itself be verified; neither can historical events; universal scientific statements; the concept of eschatological verification goes against this. Criticisms of falsification: Richard Hare – bliks (the way that a person views the world gives meaning to them even if others do not share the same view); Basil Mitchell – partisan and the stranger (certain things can be meaningful even when they cannot be falsified); Swinburne – toys in the cupboard (concept meaningful even though falsifying the statement is not possible)
Verification Principle Challenges to Verification BBC Karl Popper Falsification principle
Challenges to the Philosophical Concept of Falsification
Verification Principle Challenges to Verification BBC Karl Popper Falsification principle
Challenges to the Philosophical Concept of Falsification
C. Religious language as non-cognitive and analogical: Proportion and attribution (St Thomas Aquinas) and qualifier and disclosure (Ian Ramsey). Challenges including how far analogies can give meaningful insights into religious language. A consideration of how these two views (Aquinas/Ramsey) can be used to help understand religious teachings.
The Concept of Religious Language as Analogy
The Concept of Religious Language as Analogy
Theme D. Religious language as non-cognitive and symbolic: Functions of symbols (John Randall); God as that which concerns us ultimately (Paul Tillich). Challenges including whether a symbol is adequate or gives the right insights. A consideration of how these two views (Randall/Tillich) can be used to help understand religious teachings.
The Concept of Religious Language as Symbol
The Concept of Religious Language as Symbol
Theme E. Religious language as non-cognitive and mythical: Complex form of mythical language that communicates values and insights into purpose of existence. Supportive evidence – different forms of myths to convey meaning: creation myths; myths of good against evil; heroic myths. Myths help to overcome fears of the unknown; myths effective way of transmitting religious, social and ethical values.
Challenges: problem of competing myths; meanings of myths change over time as they reflect the values of society as societal constructs; demythologisation of myths results in varying interpretations, myths often incompatible with scientific understanding of the world.Religious Language as Mythological
Challenges: problem of competing myths; meanings of myths change over time as they reflect the values of society as societal constructs; demythologisation of myths results in varying interpretations, myths often incompatible with scientific understanding of the world.Religious Language as Mythological
Theme F. Religious language as a language game: Meaningful to people who participate in same language game (Ludwig Wittgenstein). Supportive evidence – non-cognitive form of language provides meaning to participants within language game; consider use of language not meaning; language games fit with coherence theory of truth; religious language as expressions of belief. Challenges, including rejection of any true propositions in religion that can be empirically verified; does not allow for meaningful conversations. Language Games