Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
religious language - Coggle Diagram
religious language
AYERS VERIFICATION PRINCIPLE
= the meaning of the statement is its verification
based on the Viennas circle philosophy of logical positivism
TWO TYPES OF MEANINGFUL LANGUAGE
analytic statements are true by definition (pure reason)
synthetic statements are empirically verifiable (senses)
'god exists' 'god doesnt exist' = neither analytic or synthetic = nonsense
DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN VERIFICATION...
IN PRACTICE (strong) = when statements can be conclusively established empirically = direct sense experience to support statment
IN PRINCIPLE (weak)= possible when it can be stated what observations would make the statement verifiable in practice and doing so could be possible at some point in the future = know how a statement can in principle be tested but cannot actually test it
concluded any statements unverifiable in Patrice or principle have no factual meanining
any such statement = pseudo-proposition
ethical statements = about approval or disapproval
'the term god is a metaphysical one. and if god is a metaphysical term, then it cannot even be probable that god exists' language, truth and logic AJ Ayer
STRENGTHS
aligns with scientific approach in its insistence on empirical support if any statemtns are to be meaningful - Ayers allowance of weak verification enabled scientific theories yet to be empirically proved to be considered
Ayer points to the need to be clear in ones use of language as some claims are obscure and unsupported - made philosophers think carefully about nature of RL
LIMITATIONS
assumes science tells us all about the world - Karl Popper said the verification method is flawed science and science works primarily through falsification
meaningless as it isn't empirically verifiable - any weakening of the VP's conditions/reassessment of its meaning creates further issues eg Ayer said it is a reccomendation not facts
FLEWS FALSIFICATION PRINCIPLE
developed from thinking of Karl Popper
= something can be counted as scientific only if it is possible that there could be evidence to falsify it
religious believers do not accept any evidence to falsify their beliefs = RL meaningless
not meaningful as they continue to attempt to justify God's unloving behaviour
empty and meaningless = should not be uttered as statements are vacaous
applied to making of factual cognitive claims and challenges validity of religious lang
Flew used Wisdom's parable of the invisible gardener
gardener secretly looks after garden and 1/2 explorers insist there is a gardener despite failing empirical tests to prove - the other says saying its invisible doesnt differ from an imaginary or no Gardner at all
LIMITATIONS= too rigid - many aspects of experience are not in the same category as scientific fact and have deep significance for humans
STRENGTHS = Flew points to approach that some believers of religious beliefs - they are blinkered and refuse to take seriously to those beliefs but find some excuse for god
COGNITIVE LANGUAGE
conveys factual info
synthetic statements
meaningless = against RL
STRENGTHS
makes clear and factual claims open to examination by anyone
most believers are cognitivists as committed to their beliefs as view them as factual
NON-COGNITIVE LANGUAGE
meaningful = supports RL
not dependent on whether it is empirically true
includes statements of emotion, morality, insight
STRENGTHS
doesnt pretend RL is scientific = avoids challenges by verify and false
reflects distinct views and commitments of religious people
BACKGROUND TO RELIGIOUS LANG
many factors underlying the approach of the 20th century philosophy to the meaning and significance of religious lang
empiricism of John Locke and David Hume - Humes fork = two areas which we can have knowledge; matter of fact and relations between ideas
Wittgensteins tractacus (1921) - claimed only meaningful lang was that relating to scientific fact and empirical reality
Vienna circle
logical positivism = scientific statements alone have meaning, metaphysical statements are meaningless
two types of empirical langauge are synthetic and analytic