Not only does it stand as a marker for that religion, but it also makes a powerful statement. Flew does not dogmatically declare that they cannot be, but he evidently has his doubts. References and Further Reading 1.
Presumably, he would argue that mental states would be the same in two minds, regardless of how the minds are constructed or out of what materials they are constructed. There is a two-fold evolution going on here: Thus, on the basis of Verificationism, statements about God do not have truth-values that can be verified and, thus, are unintelligible expressions.
A load of bread is good because the baker is good; the attributes of the baker caused the attributes of the bread, even though the two don't necessarily share the two attributes.
Perhaps it has become so deeply infused into our minds and our culture that we cannot rid ourselves of it. There is a long-held view that this indicates a "critical period" for language learning, similar to the "imprinting" phenomenon in birds.
He maintained that religion cannot be denounced as wrong because it is not empirical. The fighter nevertheless carries on in his belief that the stranger is in fact the leader of the resistance movement.
The only way we can describe God in a meaningful way is through the use of symbols. There are a number of philosophers and theologians who claim that it is possible to speak meaningfully about God. Metaphor theories therefore face challenges in specifying and defending the irreducibility claim as well as in as well as elaborating what a metaphor is.
In each case, the word black is being used to refer to the colour black. Phillips, and in an exam you can usually talk about the two together. My suggestion is that we understand their logical behaviour aright if we see them as primarily evocative of what we have called the odd discernment, that characteristically religious situation which, if evoked, provokes a total commitment.
He observes that in many cases the natural phenomena that are integral to giving our lives meaning are deeply mysterious, for instance, that humans are capable of consciousness and thought and the appreciation of beauty.
What are the intentions expressed by different religious statements. Aquinas described three types of analogy: People may interpret myths differently Some would argue that if there is a truth to be expressed, it should be expressed directly and not through stories Many believers take scripture literally, which is contradictory to the belief in myths Different cultures may understand myths differently Richard Dawkins argues that myths taken literally like the story of hell are damaging, particularly to children.
They also open up the levels and dimensions of the soul that correspond to those levels of reality.
Cognitive language conveys facts i. However, as will become clear in the following sections, the opposition to face value theory is not of recent vintage and although some who disagree with face value theory may be atheists, the position is not tied to atheism.
Conversion vs early-acquired religion The language-learning ability of children is different from that of adults. For instance, a descriptivist theory appears to place limits on how wrong we can be about what God is like.
Donovan calls many of these uses performative, as they serve to perform a certain function within religious life. Alston, however, does not defend complete univocity, in which ordinary terms are used in the same sense of God and creatures, because he recognizes that divine otherness, especially divine incorporeality, would preclude complete univocity.
They point to something beyond themselves They participate in that to which they point to They open up levels of reality which are usually closed to us They open up dimensions of the soul Tillich simply called this: In this paper, Weintraub points out that almost no one defends Verificationism in the contemporary philosophical community.
Analogy does not stand up to verification, because the object one is trying to illustrate by use of analogy, cannot be empirically verified.
Religious language has no meaning because believers "widen the goalposts" of their original statements continuously with ever criticism they have presented to them, until eventually the statement means nothing at all: "God works in mysterious way".
• Religious language has meaning and can be verified because it causes change in behaviour and a moral Religious language is meaningful because of its consequences.
• The difference in people's lives, is the verification of religious language. The key words and theories from the first module - Religious Language - of OCR Philosophy of Religion.
Learn with flashcards, games, and more — for free.
May 08, · (bullet points = weaknesses/criticisms) There are two main approaches to religious language (and they also serve as buzzwords. Verification invented by a group of ’s philosophers called the Logical Positivists of the Vienna Circle Language is only meaningful (Tautology) if it c.
Start studying Religious Language. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools.Religious language