To what extent do language games provide a suitable way of resolving the problems of religious language?
- Created by: blombus
- Created on: 14-05-21 10:50
View mindmap
- To what extent do language games provide a suitable way of resolving the problems of religious language?
- Religious language doesn't work the same way as ordinary language
- Religious language functions as a technical subcategory of language
- It requires specific contextual knowledge
- Explaining religious concepts to someone with no knowledge or appreciation of the religion is like speaking two different languages
- It could be seen as nonsensical to the rest of the world
- To those who don't know the proper context
- Outsiders not understanding the language doesn't mean it's universally meaningless or wrong
- Wittgenstein explained that deep language understanding requires more than vocabulary acquisition
- You need to know the context and environment surrounding the language
- This goes double for specialised and technical language
- Religious language can be seen as a specialised type of language
- This goes double for specialised and technical language
- You need to know the context and environment surrounding the language
- Why should it be any different?
- It could thus be seen as potentially invalid or meaningless
- Religious language functions as a technical subcategory of language
- It doesn't pertain to our understanding of the world
- That's only if you are attempting to examine religious claims under an empirical rubric
- Language explains that the rules of talking about the physical world and the metaphysical world don't have to align
- Football and cricket use different rules because they're completely different games
- You wouldn't try to apply the offside rule of football in the middle of cricket
- Religious believers would mostly likely disagree with the implication that they are not discussing the physical as well
- In this way, language games can't be seen to solve the issue
- Football and cricket use different rules because they're completely different games
- DIfferent language games play by different rules
- Football and cricket use different rules because they're completely different games
- You wouldn't try to apply the offside rule of football in the middle of cricket
- Football and cricket use different rules because they're completely different games
- Stephen Jay Gould's view of NOMA
- Non-overlapping magesteria
- Religious and science aren't incompatible, they just discuss different things
- Very similar to what language games imply for religious language
- Doesn't solve the issue that religious language can be seen to be making empirical claims about the physical
- Language explains that the rules of talking about the physical world and the metaphysical world don't have to align
- Religious language can be seen as a nonsense
- Religious languange's propositions have no place in the 'real' world
- That's only if you are attempting to examine religious claims under an empirical rubric
- Religious language doesn't work the same way as ordinary language
Comments
No comments have yet been made