Implication paper
- Created by: samantha
- Created on: 05-04-13 14:52
View mindmap
- Do You Agree with the ideas expressed? Point of view half of the question.
- Introduction
- Some agreement, Equally meaningless
- reliant on VP, weaknessses + cannot even verify it.
- Verification Principle
- Meaningless in own terms. (weak and strong)
- Treat statements from one language game though from other ( rel faith like scientific).
- Wittgenstein argues rel statements meaningful (if understood by other language users in specific context) ie LGAME
- If we misundrstnd way rel lang claims made then respond wrong - scientist lab "blood of christ"
- Wittgenstein argues rel statements meaningful (if understood by other language users in specific context) ie LGAME
- not only outlaws rel lang from meaningful realm - makes what humans speak/write bout meaningless too - art/beauty
- Denial of God of Classical Theism
- def of class God
- I agree definitely questionable but can't deny evidence put forward by proofs (DES)
- "aesthetic argument". Beauty not NATURAL SELECTION, no survival benefit, suggests designer. = God.
- philsophical logic, premise conclusion.
- Cumulative
- Can't deny something that holds answers for big Questions
- "aesthetic argument". Beauty not NATURAL SELECTION, no survival benefit, suggests designer. = God.
- Introduction
Comments
No comments have yet been made