Via Negativa Flashcards
(34 cards)
Religious Language:
Questions the existence of God or the nature of his attributes, in terms of the limits of human language.
Bible reference to God.:
Bible uses terms such as ‘king’, ‘Shepard’ and ‘lord’ to demonstrate that God is not a lord or a king, in the way o the earthly king.
Ludwig Wittgenstein:
- Noted that this variety in his philosophical investigations, including making us stories, plays, acting, guessing riddles, telling jokes, asking, thanking and praying.
- He speaks of ‘countries different kinds of use’ and argues that it is the work of the philosopher to contemplate those usages.
- ‘Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence of language. ‘
Two types of sentences:
Cognitive and non-cognitive.
Cognitive:
Questions whether a sentence is true or false.
E.g: Dublin is the capital of Australia. False and cognitive claim.
Non-Cognitive:
Sentences which is not appropriate to ask questions.
E.g: Orders, commands, poetry, prayers, more linguistic, are non-cognitive.
Richard Dawkins:
- Would question whether sentences are cognitive or not.
- Took the bulk of sentences which are untrue, for Dawkins, the believer speaks sentences which are untrue.
- Others believe sentences like ‘God exists’ are true sentences.
Origen:
In the third century, had argued that the genesis made no sense as a statement of fact, but that it was to be understood figuratively as indicating certain mysteries.
Discourse of faith:
Recent years, evidence suggests that all religious sentences are non-cognitive. Described as a discourse of faith.
Discourse of faith: Language as used within the religious aspect of life. Its significance and meaning are internal to a given religion.
Via- negativa: the apophatic way:
By saying what God is not, we are saying what he is.
E.g God is not a bicycle.
Gods portrayal in scriptures:
- In Judaism, the very name of God is nit fully articulated.
- In Islam, God s never portrayed visually.
Basil the Great (330-379) and Gregory of Nyssa (335-395):
Pointed to the human inability to know the essence of God. They argue that if we cannot know the mind and the essence of an ant, with his limited mind and language skills (ants have tiny brains), we can never begin to understand God.
Ponticus (345-399):
The highest understanding is ‘pyre prayer’, a union with God without words or images, a bare awareness of something beyond anything created.
KEY: Pseudo Dionysius:
Made a distinction between the cataphatic and apophatic theology.
- The via postiva does attempt to use theological language to describe God, using divine names of scripture like ‘The Good’, ‘Light of the world’, ‘life’ and so on.
-These give us a real knowledge of God.
- for the via negative it is provisional knowledge, because God lies far beyond those names.
In other words, cataphatic way uses human language to describe God, and apophatic way disagrees with this because they believe that words aren’t compatible enough to describe a divine being like god.
John Scotus Eriungena 810-877:
- Translated significant parts of the works of the Pseudo Dionysius and the influence can be seen strongly in his own treatment of God.
- God is beyond all meaning and intelligence, and he alone possesses immorality. His light is called darkness of its excellence, as no creature can comprehend either what or how it is.
Moses Maimondies: Adopted via negativa:
- Warns continually of the dangers of anthropomorphising God.
- Points out that the scriptures draw inevitably on human language, when they speak of ‘ the mouth of God’, ‘God’s right hand’ and so on, we must not think of God as literal as these phrases.
St Thomas Aquinas:
- Was sympathetic to via negativa proponents and insight.
- The essence of God was far beyond the human understanding or human language.
- The apophatic way was a prelude to understanding God.
- Took the view that God us bit ignorant or not limited by time surely tells something about God, even if we cannot know what that something may be.
AO2: Criticisms to Via- negativa:
- Any understanding that can be gleaned through his approach is actually negligible. E.g. to say that God is not a bicycle, gives no deep insight into the nature of God.
- To give a negative statement, creates an awareness of what is being denied.
- Perhaps we need both via negative and via postiva to describe God.
- Anthony Flew: By the apophatic way, we will end up arguing God out of an existence by ‘ a thousand qualifications’.
W.R. Inge:
was concerned that to deny God his descriptions was to lead to an ‘annihilation’ of both God and humanity. If we strip God from his descriptions, simply because our descriptions are limited and based on finite, human experience, we are in danger of loosing the essential link between God and the world.
-Chritian orthodoxy insists in Gods involvement in the world.
Christian thinkers G.K Chesterton and Pierre Telihard de Chardin:
spoke about the ‘divinisation of matter’, believed that finding God through our material existence was all part of his divine plan of salvation. For Telihard, if we talk significantly about God’s relationship with material things, then we are inevitably saying something positive, however, limited about him.
Teresa of Avila :
Used via-negativa to describe her ineffable religious experience.
AO2: Strengths:
- Doesn’t limit God
- Emphasises the mystery and the ‘otherness’ of God.
- wont change culture and isn’t subjective like symbolism.
Symbolism:
Developed by Paul Tillich, an approach where religious language is not literal and use metaphors to discuss God.
Tillich: Difference between signs and symbols:
- A sign is something that points something else by convention. E.g. a road sign.
- A symbol is something which participants in that to which it points. E.g. Flag to a nation represents that nation but also is party of the reality of that nation.
