Our language is experience based but religious language...
goes beyond our experience
2 of 16
What does metaphysical mean?
beyond the physical world
3 of 16
Why can defining abstract properties be problematic?
Language is unclear and it is difficult to see what is actually meant because we are discussing ideas beyond the physical world
4 of 16
Why can religious specific terminology be problematic?
It does not translate to anything beyond religion so a religious believer may not be able to communicate anything about their religion to a non-believer
5 of 16
Why is it problematic that religious language makes assertions that cannot be experienced or tested?
Not open to universal experience. Such language cannot relate to an objective experience or existence.Such claims are not verifiable or falsifiable, so they are impossible to prove or disprove so we could see such claims as meaningless
6 of 16
Why might we query the relationship of the language with the real world?
If the language used is non-rational (not according to reason), it can be difficult to comprehend what it might mean for the empirical world. If language used does not relate to the physical world, what meaning can it have for physical beings?
7 of 16
Why might some say that the function of religious language is ambiguous?
It doesn't make factual claims in the way we would normally expect
8 of 16
What is an example that religious language makes paradoxal or contradictory claims?
problem of evil
9 of 16
John 11:25
"the one who believes in me will never die" (death=end of life though?!)
10 of 16
Why would some say that religious language is subjective?
its meaning can be interpreted in different ways. There is no common basis for such terms so they may not have a specific meaning
11 of 16
What is cognitive language?
language that is empirically verifiable and makes assertions about objective reality
12 of 16
If religious language is used cognitively, it should be possible to prove its statements to be false. However, ...
it is impossible to test assertions that are made by religious language by using empirical evidence
13 of 16
If religious language is used non-cognitively, it is difficult...
to understand the subjective attitude being expressed because it cannot be shared with others and cannot be said to make any cognitive claims
14 of 16
What is falsification?
proving something false by using evidence that counts against it
15 of 16
What is verification?
proving something true by using evidence that counts towards it
16 of 16
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Our language is experience based but religious language...
Back
goes beyond our experience
Card 3
Front
What does metaphysical mean?
Back
Card 4
Front
Why can defining abstract properties be problematic?
Back
Card 5
Front
Why can religious specific terminology be problematic?
Comments
No comments have yet been made