Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Religious Language – the Problem
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Religious Language – the Problem
• “Religious language” refers to statements about God,
faith and belief.
• Religious language is problematic.
• Religious language is problematic because its meaning is
ambiguous. This is because it is used in different ways.
• Cognitively
• Non-cognitively (symbolic, metaphorical)
• Subjectively – some people are using the same language
cognitively whilst others use it non-cognitively.
“I can do all things in Christ who
strengthens me.” Philippians
4:13
Do you think everyone
means this verse in the same way?
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Religious Language – the Problem
• Cognitive language makes factual assertions.
• This means that cognitive statements can be proved true or
false, or are treated as if they can be proved true or false.
• Religious believers often make factual assertions about God
– for example they say statements such as “God exists” or
“God loves us”, and when they do this they assume that other
people can understand them to be true.
• When religious believers use language of this kind, they use
it with the assumption that claims about God can be made
and understood in the same way as other factual claims —
for example, ‘cows exist’, ‘grass is green’, ‘I will get my exam
results in August’.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Religious Language – the Problem
• Non-cognitive language makes claims or observations that are to
be interpreted in some other way.
Symbolic language:
Metaphor:
Ethical commands:
E.g. “Jesus is the bread
of life.”
Saying something is
like/is something else
to help you understand
it.
Tell you what to do/the
right way to behave.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Religious Language – the Problem
• It is not always clear when religious language is noncognitive.
• Many people interpret religious language literally,
but it could originally have been meant to be
symbolic.
• Religious language is subjective.
• Can non-cognitive language still point to a cognitive
truth?
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Logical Positivism
1. What is the Verification Principle?
2. What is the role of apriori/aposteriori statements in
Verification?
3. What is weak verification and who suggested it?
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Logical Positivism
- 1920s philosophical tradition starting in Vienna (The “Vienna
Circle”).
- Basic premise of Logical Positivism: only that which can be verified
empirically/logically have meaning.
“The meaning of a
proposition is the method of
verification.”
- Moritz Schlick
= Statements are only meaningful when
proved true or false.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Logical Positivism
-The Logical Positivists argue that there are only 2 types of
statements that have meaning:
-‘A Priori’ statements/Analytic Propositions – gained through logical
reasoning, cannot be untrue, e.g. “all cats are mammals.”
-‘A Posteriori’ statements/Synthetic Propositions – where knowledge
can be verified true or false by sense experience or experiment. E.g.
‘my pet is a cat’ (achieved through investigation).
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Strong verification
- Can be immediately proven through empirical
experiment, or sensory testing and/or through logic and
reasoning.
- Is literal, and stated in a cognitive way.
- Cannot be interpreted ambiguously.
18/01/2022
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
-
-
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
-
Religious Language: Revision
Weak Verification: A.J. Ayer
Developments later on suggested that verification can
also be ‘Weak’.
It is impossible to prove some statements through
scientific testing – for example, some things occurred in
the past and we have to rely on accounts from that time
as evidence.
These statements are still meaningful, but not as
meaningful as those we can test ourselves.
“it is verifiable in the weak sense if it is possible for
experience to render it probable.”
Therefore, historical statements are meaningful, but only
in the weak sense.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Weak Verification: A.J. Ayer
- Ayer also argued that something is weakly verifiable if it
can be verified “in principle.”
- This means that scientific knowledge can be used to
predict ideas that may be strongly verifiable in the future.
- Example: the moon landing and the splitting of the atom.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
The Falsification Principle
1. What is the basic premise of the Falsification Principle?
2. How is this demonstrated by the Parable of the
Gardener?
Can I …
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
The Falsification Principle
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
- Like the Verification Principle, it also explains why
religious language is meaningless.
- Developed by Anthony Flew in the 1950s.
- General conclusion: Religious statements are
meaningless because there is nothing that can count
against religious statements.
- Religious statements cannot be proven true or false
because religious believers do not accept against
evidence that goes against their beliefs.
- This means religious statements cannot be falsified,
which makes them meaningless.
Can I …
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
The Falsification Principle
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
Flew said that a believer’s continual refusal to accept
things which count against the existence of God made
any discussion about this meaningless. He said that
religious statements die the ‘death by a thousand
qualifications’.
- The sceptic believes that there is no gardener of a
clearing in the woods and the believer thinks that
there is, but many tests cannot verify his existence.
The believer constantly qualifies their belief in the
gardener until it becomes completely meaningless.
Can I …
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Responses to the Problem: Hare
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
Flew said that a believer’s continual refusal to accept
things which count against the existence of God made
any discussion about this meaningless. He said that
religious statements die the ‘death by a thousand
qualifications’.
- The sceptic believes that there is no gardener of a
clearing in the woods and the believer thinks that
there is, but many tests cannot verify his existence.
The believer constantly qualifies their belief in the
gardener until it becomes completely meaningless.
18/01/2022
Can I …
John Hick
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
Religious Language: Revision
Responses to the Problem: Hick
Eschatological Verification
Some statements will be proved
true after death – e.g. that there
is a heaven.
There are some propositions that cannot be verified by
everyone.
Some statements have to be verified through an action.
Can I …
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Eschatological Verification
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
• One cannot verify that there is a chair in the next room without
leaving the room to look for a chair next door.
• The only way to verify if there is life after death is to die.
• This is a religious statement that has meaning, because we know
how to verify it, therefore Ayer’s weak verification would support it.
• It cannot be verified in the “strong” sense, but it does have some
meaning according to the principle of verification.
• Hick uses Ayer’s lessening of the Verification Principle to show that
some religious statements can at least be verified in principle, and
so have some meaning.
Can I …
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Blik: Hare
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
What
does
thismeaning
mean?
•A Religious
statements
do
have
because
ofthe
the effects
that
university
student
becomes
paranoid
that
professors
have=on
believers.
atthey
hisBlik
university
are plotting
to kill him. No evidence can
A
frame
of
R.M. Hare used the example of a
R.M. Hare
make
him believe
that they are not: if they give him food
reference
through
paranoid university student to illustrate
theywhich
are poisoning
him,
if
they
tell
him
he
is
wrong
they
are
everything
how
religiousisfaith works: although it is
conspiring against him.
not a ‘true’ statement, it has meaning
interpreted.
Although the professors at the university are not trying to
for religious people and effects the
kill him, the belief that they are affects everything about his
whole way that they see the world.
university
life. The
significance
of the
belief
is what affects
Although language
cannot
make factual claims,
it still
has meaning.
R.M. Hare agrees with Anthony Flew
the student. (Falsification) that religious believers do not
This is because religious
languagetoinfluences
the their
way abeliefs.
person looks at the
allow anything
count against
world.
This is because beliefs are ‘bliks’. However
they are still meaningful to believers.
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Ludwig Wittgenstein
– Language
Games
Ludwig
Wittgenstein
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
• How
If we
do
not know
the purpose
of thename
levers in the train we
does
this help
us understand
Wittgenstein
gave
the
•
Ludwig
Wittgenstein:
rejected
the
cannot be the driver.
meaning?
‘language
games’in to
Verification
Principle
thethis
Philosophical
(1953).
• In the
same way, if claiming
weInvestigations
do not know
thethe
function
of religious
phenomenon,
that
uses
• Levers in a train carriage all look the
words
we are
not religious)
then
we
cannot use them
•same,
He(because
says
that
language
is
like
a
toolbox.
of
language
are
governed
by
rules,
but the driver’s knowledge of
meaningfully.
Every
tool has
its
own
function,
of
each
handle
allows
the
just•the
asfunction
games
are
governed
by rules.
performs
a different
role.
train
to
move.
• The
Religious
language
is
meaningful
for those
who
use it because
only
way
the
meaning
can
be
•So,
Different
words
function
in
understand
the rules
for howthe
it isdifferent
used.
•they
Wittgenstein
argued,
meaning
understood
is
through
being
part
of
ways:
“The
functions
of
words
are
as
diverse
of words has to be known from
as
the
of which
these
[tools].”
- the
People
notfunctions
in group
the ‘game’
will notobjects
be teaches
able to
understand
the way that
social
the
knowing
their
function.
language is used.
-
function of these words.
If people do not understand the language it will appear to be meaningless.
This is why atheists, like the logical positivists, reject religious language.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
The Via Negativa
•In
negativeAquinas:
theology it is accepted that the Divine is ineffable (too
Thomas
great
or too with
extreme
to be
expressed
in words.)
• Agreed
many
other
theologians
that it is easier to
Philo of Alexandria
Plotinus
•Therefore,
all
words
must
be
denied
order God
to understand
say what God is not rather thatinwhat
is.
Ultimate
reality.
•
This
is
known
as
‘Via
Negativa’
(Latin:
negative
way).
Via
Negativa
does
not
deny
the
He believed that the nature of God
•It
is
possible
to
talk
about
God
by
not
saying
what
He
is
but
by
experience
of
God
but
denies
the
was inaccessible to humans. The
saying
what
not.
use of language
to understood
describe what
nature
Godhe
could
only thus be
• Thisof
way
ofisspeaking
allows meaning
to be
God is. be
Experiencing
God
is human
talked about
in negative
terms,
stating should
•Anyone
who
uses
The
Via
Positiva
conscious
that
about
God
through
describingineffable.
what cannot be said
what
God
is
not
–
‘God
is
not
dead’.
language is inadequate when trying to describe the attributes of
about God.
God.
•This is because God is the greatest possible being, and cannot be
communicated about in human language.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Ian Ramsey:
Ian
Ramsey:
Thomas
Aquinas:
Analogy
Analogy of
of Attribution
Proportion
•• Developed
The way thatthe
we understand
a
model
is
by
qualifying
it
(so
analogy
principle.
•‘models’
Religious
language
is
analogical.
go hand in hand with ‘qualifiers’).
••The
that
language
uses
a
‘model’,
a
specific
type
of
•Argues
Analogical
=
an
analogy.
view
that
all
good
qualities
belong
infinitely
to
God
and,
A qualifier requires someone to realise that the ‘model’ is not
Attribution
= cause.
inanalogy.
proportion,
to
humans
too.
literally what God is
like.
Proportion
dictates
that in humans.
God
is
the
cause
of
all
good
things
•e.g.
ItAnalogy:
works when
wequality
have athat
human
understanding
of
‘power’
is
a
good
belongs
to
God.
Humanity
•
a
comparison
between
one
thing
and
we can
understand
whatGod
is meant
bygoodness
human ‘power’
we can we
We
understand
causes
in us. so
Therefore
something
that
we
can
apply
to
God.
also
has‘model’
‘power’.
• proportionally
The
God
is
good
needs
to
‘qualified’
another,
typically
for
the
purpose
ofgood.
explanation
understand
how much
greater
‘God’stoPower’
can understand
Godbe
is
Wecommunicate
cannot
understand
God’s power
without
meaningfully
God:referencing
God is infinitely
or
clarification.
is.about
we
can
experience.
•something
When
we
say
“God
is good”
the
model
isinthe
word
good.
good.
God
is
the
source
of
all
love
and
light
the
world,
it
is
talking about God’s
‘power’,
we use is
our
knowledge
of
•By•Understanding
human
goodness
a
model
for
This is alsomeaningful
true
for all other
good
qualities:
love, they
mercy,
justice,
Christians
understand
that
even
though
therefore
to
say
‘God
loves
us’
or
‘God is
human power to reference
something
better.
kindness,
friendliness
etc.
understanding
God’s
goodness.
use
their
every
day
language
to
describe
God ofisthese
the
light
of
the
world’
as
our
understanding
This is an analogy: humanity knows that human language
that
they
arehas
speaking
in an analogy,
because
concepts
been
caused
by God’s
existence.
limited
and
God’s
power
is undeniably
greater.
God is perfect and human language is not.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Symbols:
Paul
Tillich:
transcendent
level:
meaningfulness
•TheSymbols
are
different
to signs
The immanent
level:
meaningfulness
because
they
point
to a higher
•• Argues
people canbecause
communicate
Symbolsthat
are transcendent
• Tillichabout
arguesreligious
that during the
power.
using
andcross,
symbols.
they pointcan
to God,
themetaphors
ultimate
Eucharist
symbols
take on an
• experiences
Symbols
be physical
(e.g. the
Holy
Communion),
reality.
of meaning.
and
linguistic (e.g. Jesus being theimmanent
“bread oflevel
life”).
The qualities
thatview
are attributed
to • The
act of taking
•• The
‘symbolic’
is that religious
language
cancommunion
point to a(a
God symbolically are done so
action) brings humankind
reality
without actually describingsymbolic
it.
through analogy (like Aquinas’
directly into relationship with God
• Itanalogy
directs
to beyond
the surface
meaning.
of people
attribution)
– we
in thatlevel
moment:
This is imminent.
understand God’s love through
• Tillich:
Religious
symbols
experiencing
human
love. “open up
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?
levels of reality which otherwise were
closed to us.”
Transcendent = beyond or above the range
of normal or physical human experience.
Immanent = God constantly existing and
working throughout every part of the
universe.
Can I …
… define key
terms?
… explain
responses to
the problem of
religious
language?
18/01/2022
Religious Language: Revision
Summary
• The problem: some people, such as the Logical Positivists,
view religious language as completely meaningless because
it is non-verifiable through empiricism. Religious people are
also themselves clear on how they use language.
• Responses: in different ways, the following scholars view
religious language as being meaningful:
Hare, Hick, Wittgenstein, Aquinas, Ramsey, Tillich.
…evaluate the
effectiveness of
each approach?