Relgious Language

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Grace
  • Created on: 27-04-14 10:31
who thought we should talk about god using analogy? what is it and what were the two types
Aquinas- a similarity or likeness 1. attribution something is good because the creator is good 2. proportion something is good in context
1 of 27
who developed the idea of talking of god using analogy and how?
Ramsey- models and qualifiers e.g. god is good, god is infinitely good
2 of 27
what are 2 strengths of talking of god using analogy?
1. shows some understanding of god and avoids anthropomorphism 2. hick- helps us preserve the mystery of god
3 of 27
what is a weakness of talking about god using analogy?
analogy is too vague and leaves us unable to understand god and his actions
4 of 27
what is via negativa?
talking about god by saying what he is not e.g. god is not evil, he is not a human
5 of 27
what are three strengths of using via negativa to talk about god?
1. more respectful 2. no anthropomorphism 3. emphasises the unknown nature of god- perhaps we aren't supposed to know everything
6 of 27
what are three weaknesses of talking about god using the via negativa?
1. does negation say anything about god at all? 2. theists would want to say something positive about god 3. how is via negativa different from atheism? parable of gardener
7 of 27
what is cognitive and non cognitive language?
cog- expresses knowledge and facts non-cog- expresses things we could never know for sure e.g feelings values meta-physical claims
8 of 27
who developed the verification principle?
logical positivists from vienna circle
9 of 27
what is the verification principle?
a sentence has literal meaning if and only if the preposition it expresses can be either analytically or empirically verified or falsified
10 of 27
what is strong verification?
there is no doubt that the statement is true or false and this can be conclusively proved by experience or observation - sentence has meaning
11 of 27
what is weak verification?
statements that attempt to say something about the world can be meaningful if it is possible in principle to gather evidence to prove it can be verified
12 of 27
who developed strong and weak verification?
AJ Ayer
13 of 27
what are three weaknesses of the VP?
1. can't verify VP itself 2. weak VP supports design argument 3. Hick-eschatological verification - when we die religious statements will be verified therefore they are meaningful
14 of 27
what is the falsification principle?
assesses if something is a genuine scientific fact by considering if there is any evidence that could ever disprove them
15 of 27
what did flew use the parable of the gardener to show?
religious statements die a 'death of 1000 qualifications' religious people will never allow any evidence to count against what they say about god therefore their statements are meaningless
16 of 27
how did hare criticise the FP?
Oxford Dons- Bliks- something a person believes in and lives their life by, it may not be verifiable or falsifiable but it is meaningful as it is how the person lives their life.
17 of 27
how did mitchell criticise the FP?
Resistance leader and fighter- fighter has faith the that the stranger is who he says he is- will be confirmed when war is over- like religious people god confirmed in future- religion is based on facts and can't simply be verified/falsified- like EV
18 of 27
how did Wittgenstein change his mind about religious language?
was first a logical positivist and thought scientific verifiable fact wa the only meaningful language but changed his mind and developed idea of language games- only people inside the game understand it and it has meaning to them
19 of 27
what is a quote from wittgenstein?
"whereof one cannot speak thereof one must remain silent"
20 of 27
how did tiilich think we should talk about god?
symbols- they participate in that to which they point, they represent something but also have a deeper meaning e.g. the cross represents christianity but also the sacrifice jesus made
21 of 27
what are 3 criticisms of symbolic language?
1. meaningless symbolic not literal 2. ambiguous 3. non-cognitive
22 of 27
how does bultmann think we should talk about god?
myths- they can convey religious ideas and express cognitive ideas about god e.g. creation story- god created world and shows god cares for his creation
23 of 27
what did bultmann do do the new testament?
demythologised it so all that was left was the messages that God leaves.
24 of 27
what did macquarrie say myths did?
give an insight to what a relationship with God could be
25 of 27
what are 2 strengths of talking about god through myths
allow people to talk non-cognitively about god, aren't supposed to be verifiable and can explore human relationship with god
26 of 27
what are 2 weaknesses of talking about god through myths
1. creationists believe the bible is literal so myths actually happened 2. myths are non cognitive so can't be verified using VP therefore are meaningless
27 of 27

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

who developed the idea of talking of god using analogy and how?

Back

Ramsey- models and qualifiers e.g. god is good, god is infinitely good

Card 3

Front

what are 2 strengths of talking of god using analogy?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

what is a weakness of talking about god using analogy?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

what is via negativa?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Religious Language resources »