✅religious language Flashcards Preview

Philosophy > ✅religious language > Flashcards

Flashcards in ✅religious language Deck (76)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

what is john wisdoms parable?

A

2 explorers came upon a jungle with flowers and weeds. one thinks there must be a gardener as it is so beautiful and perfect. invisible, intangible gardener. but whats the difference between this and no gardener ar all?

2
Q

what is flews book called?

A

theology and falsification 1950

3
Q

what does flew mean by death by a 1000 qualifications?

A

you kill something by asking too mnay questions. an indea you can reject, no matter how convincing the hypothesis is. there will always be flaws.

4
Q

what is cognitive language

A

expressed facts and knowledge.

5
Q

what is non cognitive language

A

expresses things in which we could never know, eg feelings, values etc.

6
Q

what does Emil Bunner say about religious language

A

“the first and mots important thing we know about god is that we know nothing about him.”

7
Q

what did wittgenstien say about speaking

A

whereof we cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent

8
Q

what is the via negativa/apophatic way

A

literally means in a negative way. involves peaking about god using only negatives and emphasise the difference between god and humanity.

9
Q

definition of via negativa

A

God is not a universe or an object in a universe. he is not open to observation or decription. it follows that god can only be spoken of analytically o poetically.

10
Q

why is positive language flawed?

A

if we say god is good, then we can only understand this in terms of what we know to be good. he is not anything like we know, therefore this is dehumanise him. anthropomorphism

11
Q

who is pseudo dionysius

A

6th century theologian. arged via negativa was the only way to speak truthfully about God, because God is beyond all human understanding. he says god is beyond assertion.

12
Q

what did pseudo D state about talking about God?

A

via negativa (what God is not) “there is no speaking of it. darkness and light, error and truth. God is none of these” Hick
state of affirmation, what god is, the cataphatic way, or via positiva.
qualification of what god is- Gods love is immense etc

13
Q

who supports pseudo dionysius

A

moses maimonides

14
Q

who is moses maimonides

A

12th century jewish thinker. expplained that the attributes of God can only be understood through way they are not. this way of talking about Go is found in the jewish scriptures.

15
Q

who said “i am who i am” he is beyond any decrpition

A

moses mainonides

16
Q

what does peter cole think on via negativa

A

“by denying all descriptions of God, you get insight and experience of God rather than unbelief and sceptism”. denies the possibility of describing god in concrete terms.

17
Q

C S Lewis thoughts on via megativa

A

advocates the use of negative theology when first thinking about God, in order yo cleanse our minds og misconceptions. then you must refilll your minds with the truth about God, unstained by mythology and bad analogies.

18
Q

what is C S Lewis look called

A

miracles

19
Q

what are the limits of via negativa

A

suppose to make you closer to God, but just makes you more confused.
socratic method, you dont get the answer until you name everything else, and therefore it would be a positive statement
need to know what he is to say what he sis not
for religious people, it doesn’t matter.
what is the point of worshipping a god you cant describe?
cant distinguish atheism and theism, as they both speak of God negatively.

20
Q

what does brian davies think about via negativa

A

describing something in terms of what it is not, gives no clue to what it actually is.

21
Q

what are the strengths of via negativa

A
avoids anthropomorphism. 
can be seen as respectful. 
many mystics have supported the apophatic way 
emphasise the unsuitability of God. 
best way to convey a transcendent god.
22
Q

what does ahluwalia think ab out via negativa

A

points out that everything other than the idea of God is mystery makes god too small.

23
Q

what does Aquinas think about via negativa.

A

suggests that there might be a middle ground when using religious langage, ie analogy.,

24
Q

happened to aquinas?

A

in 1273, he put down his pen and said; all i have written seems like straw. his goal had been to understand God, but God is unknown.

25
Q

does the via negativa provide an effective method fort theological discussion?
YES

A

it provides the best attempt to talk about God. recognises that we have to go beyond our normal every day experiences and language in order to encounter God.
doesn’t place a limit on God by giving him reference to the physical world
we can say something literal about god and it doesnt need interpretation.
applies equally well in different cultures and history.

26
Q

does the via negativa provide an effective method fort theological discussion?
NO

A

still not easy for God to be known.
people wont understand what we are trying to say
Davies: when we try and reach something through elimination, we need to know the starting material first.
Flew: if we try and explain God as invisible etc, little difference to nothing.
many of the holy Scriptures write about God in a positive way.

27
Q

Does Aquinas’ analogical approaches support effective expression of language about God?
YES

A

‘otherness’ of God (Otto) as mysterium trememdum et fascinans.
when Jesus was teaching, he often used analogy to communicate the message.

28
Q

Does Aquinas’ analogical approaches support effective expression of language about God?
NO

A

unhelpful, as we have to translate the analogies into univocal language before they mean anything.
leaves us with an unclear picture.
If the analogy is looking upwards (Hick), into infinity, and we start from the partical shadows of human qualities, we have to use that partial understanding, to think about Gods love etc.

29
Q

can religious discourse be comprehensive if religious language is understood symbolically?
YES

A

very powerful
conveys words, not only as words but as a deeper level.
marriage, baptism, ritual bath, purification, etc.
the change in interpretation is a good thing, as it doesn’t carry intrinsic meaning.

30
Q

can religious discourse be comprehensive if religious language is understood symbolically?
NO

A

Hick argues in his book “philosophy of religions 1973” that Tillich over emphasises the aesthetic nature of religious symbol.
no factual content in religious language and that is it an appeal to an emotional response.
symbols leave us with no way of knowing what is a valid insight into ultimate reality.
very dependent on culture.
misinterpreted in a different culture.

31
Q

Hicks book

A

book “philosophy of religions 1973”

32
Q

what does aristotle say about analogy?

A

aristotle said first to develop arguments based on likeness. he wrote “it would follow that where they have an identical attribute, to that extent they are alike.”
4 POINTS:
strength of an analogy depends on the number of similarities.
similarity exists only in identical relations and properties.
good analogies are based on underlying common causes or general principle
good analogical arguments do not need to assume acquaintance with underlying generalisation.

33
Q

what is the cataphatic way?

A

use positive language to convey meaning about God. Aquinas argued we cant say anything hat is LITERALLY true about God in human language.
Can use language in an analogical form to demonstrate God.

34
Q

what is Via Eminentiae?

A

way of eminence. to show that what we say of God and what we know of God is only partial.

35
Q

what were humes criticism for Paleys and Aquina analogies?

A

aptness of analogy.

36
Q

what are the 2 types of analogy?

A

analogy of attribution, and analogy of proportion.

37
Q

what is analogy of attribution?

A

aquinas thought we could gain understanding of God by considering his role as a creator. If God made the world, then the world must reflect God.
the health of an animal is in its urine, we can tell the bull is healthy by studying this. however, the health of the bull is only complete in the bull itself. what the urine tells us is indirect and incomplete, so too with God.
what the world tells is of his goodness is meaninful, but it is limited.

38
Q

what is the order of reference?

A

Gods goodness is foremost, because he is the source of this quality. the world has goodness only in a secondary respect.

39
Q

what is the analogy of proper proportion?

A

John Hick developed Aquinas ideas. idea that humans possess Gods qualities because we are created by God. Yet,m because God is perfect, we have his qualities in a lesser proportion.

40
Q

what was the example Hick usd to explain analogy of porper proportion?

A

Hick gave the example of faithfulness. humans can be faithful to each other in speech and behaviour. Dogs can too, but a great difference between the qualities. yet there is a reasonable similarity.

41
Q

what is the analogy of improper proportion?

A

an analogy is just a metaphor and doesnt really deal with proportionate qualities. for instance, God is a rock. this ignores essential differences in qualities for the sake of a loose comparison.

42
Q

“it seems that no word can be used literally of God”

A

Aquinas, Summa theologica.

43
Q

strengths of Cataphatic way

A

RL is not absurd and can provide some understanding.
avoids the pitfalls f anthropomorphism and agnosticism.
HICK argues it enables us to make statements about God, and preserve the mystery of Christianity.

44
Q

weaknesses of the Cataphatic way

A

Darwins theory of evolution
evil is in the world. does this mean a quality of God is evil?
Mill argues God is evil due to the immoral actions in the world.
“standpoint of verification”, object we are drawing an analogy of God cannot be verified

45
Q

Duns scotus on via positiva

A

vague and leaves us with no understanding

46
Q

william blackstone on via positiva

A

criticises Aquinas doctrine of analogy, have to translate analogies into uni vocal language before it means anything. still degrading God.

47
Q

swinburne on via positiva

A

unecessary theory. we can speak of God and humans as good uni vocally, just humans and God possess it in different ways.

48
Q

what does hume say about via positiva

A

telelogial argument, epicurus thesis, cause and effect and aptness of analogy.

49
Q

what does vincent brummer say about via positiva

A

careful about using terms about God. “using analogy of proportion, we are saying no more that God is not wise.”

50
Q

what was Ian Ramsay ideas about the cataphatic way

A

models and qualifiers. model is creating the analogy, and the qualifier is the adjective to show God is different.

51
Q

what does Frederick ferre say about via positiva

A

it is a starting point, gives us a way to talk about God.

52
Q

what does Tillich say the difference of a sign and symbol is?

A

sign is something that “something winch represents something else”
symbol is “a pattern or object, which points to an invisible metaphysical reality and participates in it”

53
Q

what does paul Tillich think about RL?

A

all religious language is symbolic. except the statement “God is being itself”

54
Q

what types of symbols are there?

A

Negated, affirmed, transcends all at the same time.

55
Q

what does C D Broad think about symbols?

A

no spiritual sight. copleston: “if you dont play chess you cant be checkmated.”

56
Q

what are the 4 key features of symbols?

A

point to something beyond themselves,
participate in that to which they point
open up levels of reality which otherwise are closed to us
open up dimensions of the soul which correspond to those aspects of reality.

57
Q

what did randall think about symbols

A

Randall had similar ideas to tillich, however offered an non cognitive and non representative approach, meaning religious language is seen as a human activity which makes special contribution to human culture.

58
Q

strengths of symbols

A

modes of communication
truths about religion beyond the factual world
valuable to religios discourse which deals with the factual and objective
flexible in themselves

59
Q

what did rowan williams say about symbols

A

ROWAN WILLIAMS: “like all other serious discourse, RL requires a symbolic foundation”

60
Q

criticisms of Symbols

A

neither adequate or appropriate.
how do you know that symbols dont give wrong insights about the ultimate reality?
everyone must have the same idea of what a symbol is.
may become a focus of worship rathere than directing attention to God
can become trivialised.

61
Q

Hick on symbols

A

idea of participating in a symbol is unclear.

62
Q

alston on symbols

A

“There is no point trying to determine whether a statement is true or false”

63
Q

Macquarrie on symbols

A

in principle of christian theology, disagreed with tillich ideas of the use of the word symbol. not consistent with English language.
he admitted this distinction could be blurred ad that the real value of symbols is in the existential response.

64
Q

what does paul edwards say about symbols

A

symbols don’t convey any factual knowledge, they are meaningless.

65
Q

What does Vincent brummers think about analogy

A

There are significant issues to suggest that we can usefully say that we can use terms about god without knowing precisely what they mean. God nature is “not accessible to us”. Analogy gives the appearance of saying something but you remain ignorant

66
Q

What does Frederick ferret say about analogy

A

Counter argues than analogy provides us with a rule to enable us to use theological language about god. Said we should concentrate on how words need to be used carefully.

67
Q

What is a myth?

A

Myths are stories that use symbols, metaphor and allegory to convert a religious truth, the story itself isn’t true, a religious truth is conveyed. The myth is intended to encourage a specific attitude in the people hearing it.

68
Q

What does rudolf bultmann think about myths.

A

He defines a myth as the use of imagery to express the other worldly in the terms of this world. What is presented in myths is not literal truths but a deep truth that required a response.

69
Q

What does Ian Ramsay think about religious language?

A

Developed the theory of analogy in the 20th century, Ramsey refers to models and qualifiers,

70
Q

What did Paul Edwards think about symbolic language?

A

Didn’t believe that symbols coney any factual knowledge and were meaningless. Tillich argued that symbols were intended to convert facts and therefore cannot be verified or falsified.

71
Q

What does braithwaite think about religious language

A

Printed out that the error of the verification and falsification principles had been to treat religious language as cognitive, when it is in fact non Cognitive.

72
Q

What did Hume think about univocal language?

A

Words such as “wisdom, through and design” are ascribed to god because those words are honourable to man and we have no other language by which we can express our adoration of him

73
Q

“The first and most important thing we know about god is that we know nothing of him”

A

Emil Brunner

74
Q

Psalms

A

“Silence is praise to thee”

75
Q

“There is no speaking of it. Darkness and light.. god is none of these”

A

Pseudo Dionysius

76
Q

Peter Cole quote

A

“By denying all descriptions of god, you get insight and experience of god rather than unbelief and scepticism”