The Verification Principle

Created by: likeihaveaclue
Created on: 22-05-15 12:08


	The Verification Principle
	Advantages Clear parameters to verifying a statement; either it can be verified empirically via experience or it is a tautology (true by definition) Supported by the arguments of Locke and Hume; truth and knowledge were to be known via our senses It is not just an argument against God and his existence; both the agnostic and atheist are making meaningless statements Weak verification is Ayer's contribution: it states that in order to be meaningful, a statement may not be verifiable but instead can be shown to be true within reasonable doubt Weak verification means we can make statements about history, scientific theories and human emotion but not religion and ethics	Disadvantages The strong form of verification principle is too rigid, to the point that we cannot make statements about anything without empirical observation, such as historical statements Scientific laws become meaningless as we cannot verify it, e.g. I cannot verify gravity is constant as I cannot be in every place at once Swinburne argued universal statements cannot be verified so seem meaningless, yet we would all agree 'all humans are mortal' Comparative statements are also meaningless because they are subjective, e.g. if I see a child's drawing as more beautiful than the Mona Lisa and someone disagrees, we are both meaningless as neither can be verified Hick claims the verification principle may not make religious statements meaningless due to eschatological verification: at the end of a journey (look at Hick's analogy of two travellers) the answer would be verified in favour of believers OR verificationists Some religious statements might be verifiable in principle, such as Biblical events The verification principle itself is unverifiable: it isn't a tautology nor can it be proved via experience
	Evaluation The verification principle ends arguments about what can be meaningful and if followed, would mean the only conversations could be about mathematics, science and other topics only known to be true beyond reasonable doubt; however, without knowing what exactly is reasonable doubt means that discussion would be limited. While we may agree religion and ethics is meaningless, that doesn't mean it is valueless; religion has value to believers and has shown to have some benefit to society, showing that just because something is meaningless doesn't mean it should be disregarded. This theory is too rigid, including weak verification and so is not suitable for determining what should be considered meaningful in all senses of the word.

The Verification Principle

Advantages

Clear parameters to verifying a statement; either it can be verified empirically via experience or it is a tautology (true by definition)
Supported by the arguments of Locke and Hume; truth and knowledge were to be known via our senses
It is not just an argument against God and his existence; both the agnostic and atheist are making meaningless statements
Weak verification is Ayer's contribution: it states that in order to be meaningful, a statement may not be verifiable but instead can be shown to be true within reasonable doubt
Weak verification means we can make statements about history, scientific theories and human emotion but not religion and ethics

Disadvantages

The strong form of verification principle is too rigid, to the point that we cannot make statements about anything without empirical observation, such as historical statements
Scientific laws become meaningless as we cannot verify it, e.g. I cannot verify gravity is constant as I cannot be in every place at once
Swinburne argued universal statements cannot be verified so seem meaningless, yet we would all agree 'all humans are mortal'
Comparative statements are also meaningless because they are subjective, e.g. if I see a child's drawing as more beautiful than the Mona Lisa and someone disagrees, we are both meaningless as neither can be verified
Hick claims the verification principle may not make religious statements meaningless due to eschatological verification: at the end of a journey (look at Hick's analogy of two travellers) the answer would be verified in favour of believers OR verificationists
Some religious statements might be verifiable in principle, such as Biblical events
The verification principle itself is unverifiable: it isn't a tautology nor can it be proved via experience

Evaluation

The verification principle ends arguments about what can be meaningful and if followed, would mean the only conversations could be about mathematics, science and other topics only known to be true beyond reasonable doubt; however, without knowing what exactly is reasonable doubt means that discussion would be limited. While we may agree religion and ethics is meaningless, that doesn't mean it is valueless; religion has value to believers and has shown to have some benefit to society, showing that just because something is meaningless doesn't mean it should be disregarded. This theory is too rigid, including weak verification and so is not suitable for determining what should be considered meaningful in all senses of the word.

Comments

donna1205

Report Sat 6th May, 2023 @ 07:45

They believed that by limiting meaningful coreball statements to those that could be verified, they could avoid these problems and create a rigorous, scientific approach to philosophy.

clark2ken

Report Sun 11th June, 2023 @ 19:56

While we’ve all seen movies and heard stories about swearing parrots, it can cause a big problem for the bird avian parrot for sale if you ever need to rehome it.

Report Sun 11th June, 2023 @ 19:58

Finding a buyer for a used parrot with a bad mouth would probably be tough because many prospective buyers will avian home Australia doubtfully be interested.

Get Revising

The Verification Principle