A2 PHILOSOPHY: RELIGIOUS
LANGUAGE: SYMBOL, MYTH, ANALOGY
ANALOGY
AQUINAS:
suggests that language about God
should be understood as
analogical, as an alternative to
understanding language univocally
and equivocally
rejected the via negativa
rejected
univocal:
attributes of
God are part
of his
necessary
essence
rejected equivocal: would
never learn anything about
God this way
God is infinite, how
can the finite grasp
the infinite
ANALOGY provides a middle way, there are 2
types of analogy:
ANALOGY OF
ATTRIBUTION
establishes a
casual
relationship,
can call God
good, he is
the cause of
all good
ANALOGY OF PROPORTION
qualified
by the
nature of
what it is
being
applied
too
he thought it was
possible to speak of
God positively in
non-literal and
analogical terms
RAMSEY
used analogy to argue that it is possible to speak meaningfully about God
God can be used as a model
insight/disclosure into
the qualities of God
STRENGTHS
given the
infinite
nature of
God and the
finite
nature of
humans,
analogy
provides an
appropriate
way to
speak about
God which
is neither
empty nor
to be taken
literally
gets past the problems of
univocal and equivocal
langauge
avoids anthropomorphism
WEAKNESSES
must be
assumed that
language applies
equivocally for
analogy to work
SWINBURNE: questioned what is wrong with univocal
language: can legitimately speak of God's existence and
of our own
assumes qualities of God
MYTH: stories conveying meanings
and truths. They point to realities
which cannot be expressed in other
ways
HICK: "not literally true, does not literally apply,
invites a particular attitude in its hearers"
VATTIMO: we have our own myths which shape our world
MACINTYRE: cant split myths from
reality, from a religious perspective,
they are meaningful narratives which
express basic human concerns about
existence, they have the ability to
communicate fundamental truths
KAREN ARMSTRONG: "big bang is mythical language for scientists"
Do they convey liberal truths? Truth
about the nature of human existence,
could equally be expressed once
narratives have been demythologised
STRENGTHS
ways of conveying religious beliefs
easily to younger generations (memorable)
makes via
negativa
unnecessary
communicates universal themes
can be
applied to all
cultures
relevantly
WEAKNESSES
did scholars intend their narratives to be myths?
devalues meaning
no external criteria allowing us to judge
stories were once viewed as truths, it is
only now that they are regarded as myths
SYMBOLS
evoke an understanding of God
BULTMANN: teachings in the Bible, apocalyptic
language of the NT lies in early Church teachings
in mythical forms
TILLICH: open up new levels of reality. They are
different to signs, and make it possible to say
something meaningful about God. Not to be
understood as saying something literal about
God. God is not just one thing,.
symbols have meaning beyond themselves,
they are important in evoking meaning
REALISTS
believe
thereto be
something
ultimately real
which all our
symbols of or
about God
refer to
HICK: religious people use their own culturally bound symbols.
symbols of "love" and "being"
participate in the divine reality
without actually being the
divine reality.
inner
connection
means the
symbol chosen
is never
arbitrary
STRENGTHS
provides a way to talk about God
symbols are potent for what they stand for
universal resonance as conveyers of meaning
avoid anthropomorphism
metaphoric
WEAKNESSES
come on to take a literal meaning
DAWKINS: leads to
the conclusion
there is no real
truth
TILLICH fails to
explain what it
means to say that
things participate
in what they
symbolise