Flashcards
Religious Language
Cards in this deck (9)
- 1Explain both: • religious language as non-cognitive • language games.- Wittgenstein
^ rejects VP
^ each activity has its own language out in place by the community/society that perform the activity
^ own set of rules
^ example: only people that watch/play football will know what the offside rule is
^ people that are not in the game won't understand
- blik
- we don't gain any information from RL > we can still infer things from it
^ if we hear a scream it does not tell us anything about whats happening but we can infer that someone may be in danger - 2‘Using language games is effective in enabling people to speak meaningfully about God.’ How far do you agree?- Wittgenstein > language games
- the idea that only the people involved - 3Explain how the verification and falsification principles challenge religious language.- Verification Principle:
^ logical positivists > RL is meaningless to talk about because we cannot prove it empirically
^ analytical propositions (a priori) = knowledge gained through logical reasoning = definition= e.g 'bachelors are unmarried'
^ synthetic proposition (a posteriori) = by experience/experiment= e.g 'John is a bachelor' can be verified by asking John
^ RL is not univocal > it is equivocal
- strong/weak = Ayer - 4Explain how the verification and falsification principles challenge religious language.- Falsification Principle:
^ Antony Flew
^ RL is meaningless because nothing can count against it
^ can't be proven true or false because religious believers do not accept any evident against it
- Parable of the Gardener - 5Assess how far religion has successfully defended itself against the challenges of the verification and falsification principles.- it is developed by non-believers > fail to grasp meaning/purpose of RL > language games
- trying to convey revelations which are ineffable > meaning not conveyed using verifiable language > St John: via negativa
- not to gain knowledge but to influence > blik - 6With reference to religious language, explain: the verification principle a ‘blik’ eschatological verification.- Verification Principle
^ logical positivists
^ RL is meaningless because it can not be proven empirically
^ strong and weak
- 'blik'
^ R.M. Hare
^ cannot give us factual information but still has meaning
^ influences the way we behave
^ e.g uni student that believed that the dons at his uni were plotting to kill him > may not be true but it influenced the student so its still meaningfull
- eschatological verification:
^ Hick
^ some statements can only be verified after death > e.g that there is a life after death > 'for if its prediction is true, it'll be know to be true' - 7'Religious language is best understood as symbolic' Assess this claim
- 8Explain both of the following terms in the context of religious language: - analogical - symbolic- analogical:
^ Aquinas
^ word when applied to God has a diff meaning from its everyday use
^ analogy of proportion: word used to refer to a quality that thing possesses in proportion to its reality = e.g a dog being loyal is completely diff to a human being loyal
- analogy of attribution: applies when a term, originally used concerning one thing, is applied to a second thing, because one causes the other = e.g calling someone 'sickly' because they are sick - 9Explain both of the following terms in the context of religious language: - analogical - symbolic- Symbolic
^ Paul Tillich
^ closer to poetry than prose
^ mythical, heroic, imaginable
^ evocative of experience it seeks to prove
^ 'opens' new levels of reality > beyond external world
^ symbol 'unlocks dimensions and elements of our soul
^ Randall:
^ contributes to human culture
^bind communities together
^ Jung:
^ archetypes # nbbn nh
Information
- Description
- Religious Studies A-Level Flashcards on Religious Language , created by Raquel Ferrao on 19/06/2017.
- Created by
- Raquel Ferrao
- Views
- 0
- Rating