Religous Language Flashcards by Maddie Lenny

Cognitive statements

True or false

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Non cognitive statements

Opinion or subjective, not true or false

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Richard Dawkins

Religious language is cognitive and false

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Via Negativa

Process of negation, working out what God is not

It’s not possible to say what he is, he’s beyond our understanding

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Mysticism and Via Negativa

Knowledge only comes from mystical experiences

Negation via meditation etc

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Neoplatonism on Via Negativa

Plotinus

God is beyond description and language

Image less and apopthatic meditation

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Pseudo Dionysius on Via Negativa

Language becomes restricted as thought becomes more complex

All terms must be denied of God

All language to describe God is evocative and non cognitive

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Process of Via Negativa

1- Start with the assertions of the lowest of creatures

2- Progress to deny god of the attributes of these creatures

3- Ascend into the divine realm via progressive denials

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Moses Maimonides on Via Negativa

Denying every attribute of god brings you closer to him

Talking of god in any other way anthropomorphises him which of forbidden for Jews

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Aquinas on Via Negativa

First cause underpasses human understanding and speech

Must acknowledge what falls short of what god is

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

WR Inge criticism of Via Negativa

To deny god his positive descriptions would annihilate the relationship between god and man

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Pros of Via Negativa

Human ideas of God are poor

Positive talk limits him to a body and human attributes

Allows understanding of equivocal language

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Cons of Via Negativa

Is the highest reality is beyond words why speak of it

Says nothing about god, just things about nothing

Undermines the positive descriptions of god in scripture

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Via positiva

Cataphatic way

Positive language to describe God

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Eastern Orthodox Church on Via Negativa and Positiva

Use via Negativa and positiva

Theosis - unity of god

Leads to an ultimate understanding

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Pierre Teilhard on Via positiva

Finding god through our material sense is gods plan

It make senses to talk of Gods love through the love we experience

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Aquinas on Via possitiva/ analogy

We can speak analogically of god because he is the cause of all things

Eg) ‘God is good’ is okay because he created goodness

We understand God’s perfection and use our language as analogies

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Aquinas analogy of attribution

When one thing is applied to a second thing because one causes the other

Eg) a sickly look due to sickness

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Aquinas analogy of proportionality

A word referring to a quality that a thing possesses in proportion to its reality

We understand god as all powerful with our human idea is power, god is proportionally more powerful

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Hume criticism of Aquinas on analogy/ Via possitiva

All descriptions of god fall into the danger of anthropomorphism

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Religious language

Ian Ramsey concept of analogy

Study These Flashcards

Models = our idea of things like goodness

Qualifiers- gods ideas, the qualifier is infinity, gods greatness is infinitely greater than ours

Religious language

C Brown on analogy

Study These Flashcards

God has travelled himself in action therefore can be described analogically

Religious language

Criticisms of analogy

Study These Flashcards

Analogy presupposes the existence of God

Analogy must lead to shared understanding, not possible when talking of God as he’s beyond human understanding

Religious language

Aquinas crit of equivocal language

Study These Flashcards

Conveys no info about god

There is a link between god and humans

Religious language Aquinas crit of univocal language

Fails to take into account the transcendence of god

Religious language Remotion and excellence in language

All creaturely concepts are removed from a word so the quality has no defects when applied to god

Religious language Symbols

Carry Emotional powerful messages

Religious Language Paul Tillich on symbolic language

Symbolic language transcends the capacity of any finite reality to express it directly Religious language goes beyond the external world and into the internal reality

Religious language JR Randall on symbolic language

Religious language isn’t factual it takes us beyond the ultimate reality

Religious language Erika Schubert on symbolic language

Symbol expresses what is beyond rational recognition Distinguishes humans from animals

Religious language Raran Williams on symbolic language

Religious language needs a symbolic foundation

Religious language Criticism of symbols- P Edwards

Symbols do not convey factual info = meaningless Can’t be verified empirically

Religious language Verification principle

Verified statements are meaningful

Religious language Schlick on VP

Pointless to talk of anything that can’t be proved empirically

Religious language 3 forms of verifiable statements in VP

Analytical Synthetic Mathematical

Religious language AJ Ayer on VP

Talk of god must be nonsensical The notion of a person who’s essential attributes are not empirical is not an intelligent notion

Religious language Keith ward crit of VP

Just because we can’t verify god doesn’t mean he isn’t verifiable “If I were god I could verify my own existence”

Religious language Criticisms of VP - Richard Holder

Vp creates false conclusions Assumes polar bears are all white, and a brown chimpanzee proves polar bears are white

Religious language AJ Ayers weak verification principle

A statement has a form of observation acting as proof Allows historical statements

Religious Language Criticism of weak VP - Keith Ward

VP excludes nothing since all experiences are allowable under weak vp

Religious language Falsification principle - Anthony Flew

Religious statements have no facts Statements only meaningful if evidence can count against it Religious believers will never let anything discredit their beliefs

Religious language Criticisms of FP - Hick

Eschatological verification - religious statements are proved/disproved upon death

Religious language Swinburne crit of FP

We can never prove toys move when we aren’t looking We understand the meaning behind the concept of them moving even if we can’t falsify the act

Religious language Crit of FP - Basil Mitchell

Partisan and stranger parable Meets a double agent, tho their actions suggest he is on the opposite side, the person knows they are truthfully on their side Can’t be proved false - therefore religious statements are factual

Religious language Wittgenstein on language

Language creates imagery that differs from person to person Coherence of truth - a word has meaning if it has meaning to you

Religious language DZ Phillips in support of Wittgenstein

Religious statements are expressions of opinion

Religious language Crit of DZ Phillips

Rules out gods existence as flawed belief

Religious language Hare crit of FP- BLIKs

Things are meaningful to those who believe in them

Religious language Language games - Ludwig Wittgenstein

Language is a game with rules, those outside the game don’t understand the rules Problems occur when language is used outside its own set of rules Non cognitive

Religious language John hick criticism of BLIKs

There are sane and insane BLIKs, which is which in religion?

Religious language Pros of language games

Mc cutcheon - “you can do that = you can say that”

Religious language Cons of language games

All humans are part of different games, must have common ground for all

Religous Language Flashcards

(52 cards)