4B: Falsification

Question 1

Background of logical positivism

Answer 1

• Found in the work of Hune
• Has most of its origins in the work of the Vienna Circle: a group of scientifically trained philosophers

Question 2

What did the Vienna Circle state about language?

Answer 2

• It is only meaningful if it is based on empirical knowledge; any other form of language is meaningless because it is unverifiable
• Logical positivism only accepts language as meaningful if it can be objectively proved

Question 3

What did the Vienna Circle state were the two ways to illustrate if language was meaningful or meaningless?

Answer 3

Verification and falsification

Question 4

What is the verification principle?

Answer 4

• States only two groups of language are meaningful
• First, there are statements that are true within themselves or self-evidently true: therefore meaningful. Includes mathematical statements, analytical statements and tautologies
• Second, there are factual (synthetic/a posteriori) statements: can be confirmed through the senses
• Statements/language that lay outside of these groups were considered meaningless

Question 5

What did Ayer define ‘meaningless’ as?

Answer 5

A statement that is not factually significant

Question 6

What is the name of Ayer’s work in which he developed the Vienna Circle’s logical positivists?

Answer 6

‘Language, Truth and Logic’ (1936)

Question 7

What did Ayer believe about the term ‘God’?

Answer 7

It is metaphysical, so therefore cannot be verified, therefore it is meaningless, so any sentence involving God must also be meaningless
- He believed objective religious statements were still meaningful though

Question 8

What is strong verification?

Answer 8

Accepting only directly verifiable statements

Question 9

What is weak verification?

Answer 9

A statement is factual and meaningful if sense experience can go at least some way to confirming it.

Question 10

Why did weak verification become popular?

Answer 10

It was realised that a strong version would out rule many historical statements : ie the Battle of Hastings cannot be verified as no one is alive who witnessed it

Question 11

What are some problems of verification?

Answer 11

1. Fails its own test; the verification principle is neither logically obvious or supported by empirical evidence
2. Historical statements; Ayer had to add weak verification because his initial theory did not count historical statements as meaningful
3. Post mortem verification: Hick argued Christian concept of God was verifiable in principle. Using parable of the journey to the Celestial City, he demonstrates whilst the knowledge of the existence of God may not be immediately verifiable in practice, there is the possibility that it can be verified post-morte

Question 12

What did Popper argue about falsification?

Answer 12

• Einstein’s theory of gravity was scientific because it was potentially falsifiable
• Its truth or falseness could be tested against empirical observations of the universe
• Astrology on the other hand was labelled as unscientific as people who accept it do not allow any evidence to counter it

Question 13

What did Flew argue about falsification?

Answer 13

• a statement is only meaningful if it can be falsified.
• Theists intend their language to be taken factually and make assertions
• However, assertions must give the conditions under which they can be falsified
• Flew argues religious believers do not give the conditions which will count against their claim; effectively makes their religious statement meaningless.
• For example, when a believer states that “God loves us as a father loves his children”, we would expect divine help in times of serious trouble or disease, yet God seems distant, absent; so believers generally make some qualification - God’s love is not like human love
• He argues that religious believers have killed their own religious claims ‘by a thousand qualifications’.

Question 14

What is the parable of the gardener?

Answer 14

• Two explorers come across a clearing in which grow flowers and weeds
• One argues there is a gardener on account of the flowers, the other argues there could be no gardener on account of the weeds

Question 15

What does Flew argue about the parable of the gardener?

Answer 15

• The religious believer is guilty of the same error as the man who believed in the presence of the gardener
• Failure to prove God’s existence doesn’t lead to a withdrawal of the believers faith claims: rather they continue to believe in a God

Question 16

How does Hare criticise falsification?

Answer 16

• takes an existential view (belief that everyone is a unique free willed being)
• the concept of meaningfulness comes from the impact that a belief had on the unique individual: not from the empirically falsifiable

Question 17

What does Hare mean by ‘bliks’?

Answer 17

• describe the way individuals look at their lives and experiences
• argued a blik had the power to change our behaviour and the relationship that we had with the world around us
• argues bliks absolutely meaningful to individuals, even if it cannot be falsified.
• illustrates this through the parable of the university dons and the lunatic student

Question 18

How does Mitchell criticise falsification?

Answer 18

• argues Flew does not really understand the religious person’s perspective
• Flew argued that religious believers allow nothing to count against their beliefs, however, Mitchell argues that this was an over-simplification of religious belief
• religious believers are frequently faced with challenges to their religious belief, including evidence that seems to be contrary to their beliefs. It is a matter of faith as to how the individual deals with these challenges, but it fundamentally wrong to say that such evidence had no impact on the religious believer
• he beliefs Flew misunderstands the challenge of holding a religious faith and vulgarly simplifies it

Question 19

How does Swinburne criticise falsification?

Answer 19

• there are lots of cases where language is accepted as meaningful, even if it cannot be
• Eg our partner might tell us they ‘love’ us. Although this cannot be falsified, most human beings will accept it as meaningful, even to the extent of committing themselves to a life long partnership to the person who said: ‘I love you’.
• His own example is ‘toys in a cupboard’ that come to life; though there is no evidence to falsify the claim but the idea remains meaningful to those who hear it