Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

"Evaluate the claim that analogy can be used to express the human…

- - - - we cannot compare ourselves to God, God is omnipotent, omnibelovent and omni... meaning that if we call Good great and someone else great, we are lowering God down to the standards of Humans.
- - - - supported by Karl Barth, we cannot compare ones goodness to goodness as they are not the same, this is seen as a way of disrespecting God.
        
        weakness of the via positivia
        
        these are the major weaknesses with the via positive and the via negative, via positive has issues that we are using words that we use on a day to day basis to describe God, suggesting that God is not unique or special but only to be described with by basic vocabulary.
        
        wekanesses of the via negativa
        
        cannot say anything good about God, by stating what he is not, does not provide any further Understanding of God (as it is not telling us what he is)
    - - issue with the analogy of proportion is that Aquinas does not offer anyway that we know how much greater God is, no point of reference to judge
      - does not provide an alternative to better understand God
  - - - Including God - when we state that God is good and humans are good. Gods goodness is proportionally better than teh humans goodness because good is infinte
        
        Additionally God is completely different to humans, using our human compphrension we understand that
        
        negative as Aquinas's anaology on propositon does not tell us how much greater is God
- - - - this means that we are allowed to use this language as long as it is in the right context as the words that we use to describe God function differently to the words that we would use to describe someone else
    - - vincent burner
        
        states that we are describing Gods with words that we do not understand, in addition Gods nature is not accessible to us meaning that there is no reason to use religious language as this only leads to more confusion and to waste time; however we shoudl also not use human terminology to describe God. Linking the points when we use apathic and cataphatic way to describe God we bring him down to the same level as which is wrong
    - - positive
        
        Ferre provides a way for people to talk about God, unlike Aquinas or Vincent, they do not provide another way to describe God implying that we do not talk about him. Ferre is one of the only philosophers that provide a way for people to talk about God will trying to just not use colloquial language to describe him but rather intrecut and complex language to describe God (e.g. words that you would not use to describe someone else)
        
        supported by Ian ramsey
        
        states that we can make sense of God using religious language, this is through the dislcosure situations and the qualified model
        
        Qulaified model
        
        Gods goodness is infinite, so when we describe a human with the word "good" it is only just a mere copy/model of Gods goodness (it is not the same through the via positive). he uses teh analogy of a plane, when we make a model of a plane, it does not function like a real plane, but gives a way for us to easily understand how it is going to work. links to religious language and states all words that we can use to describe God are just mere copies of what God actually is. he states that god is the first cause unlike everything else (the unmoved mover) and how that he is truly unique. meaning that even if we just called God good (using Aquinas's theory) it is factual that God is not on the same level as humans anyway.
- - - - we should not limit ourselves from using theological language to describe God, instead we should talk about God in the right context, meaning that we can use equivocal language to describe God (words have different relative meanings in different situations)
        
        however has many weaknesses like...
        
        Vincent burner tells us that we trying to use words to describe God that we do not know the meaning of - Gods nature is not accessible meaning that we should not use religious language to try to understand God as this only leads to more confusion