P4C WR- Religious language as non cognitive and analogical

Key Scholars

Aquinas, Ramsey

Two ways Aquinas claimed language can be used

Univocally, Eqivocally

Univocal language

Language that means the same thing in each case used e.g. a lion is a mammal and a giraffe is a mammal

However, if language about God was univocal then it would limit God

Equivocal language

Has different, unrelated meanings in each case e.g. baseball bat and bat the animal

However, if the language used to describe God was equivocal then we would have no actual understanding of God

Third way in which a term can be used

Analogy- comparison between two things that have some similarities but are not the same

Example in which an analogous term is used

Healthy

Can refer to health itself

Can be used in expressions such as “healthy medicine” or “healthy food”, they have relation to health but not health itself- a cause of health

Analogy of attribution- causal link (Aquinas)

We reflect something of the atrributes of God- God is good because God is the cause of all goodness, and so just as God is good, and as He cretaed everything, we are good too

Analogy of Attribution- Bull’s urine example

a) The bull is healthy

b) The bull’s urine is healthy

The urine reflects the overall health of the bull

Analogy of proportion (aquinas)

We share aspects of a common nature to God as we are made in his image, but on a different scale

To say that God is powerful and we are powerful is not the same thing, as we have power in proportion to our humanity but God obviously has much more being omnipotent

We must ‘extend upwards’ when we speak of God

Ramsey’s development of Aquinas

Disclosure and qualifiers

Disclosure

The moment where we discover something more about the subject, the penny drops

Disclosure- Court example

A judge conducting a court case suddenly realises that the defendant is her old school friend ‘Sammy’, and so the normal work situation contains a ‘disclosure’ which has made it personally meaningful

Ramsey- Models

Words used to speak about God that we understand because we have a refernce point in our own human experience e.g. ‘loving’ and ‘righteous’

Ramsey- Qualifiers

To ensure that we don’t limit God we need to use qualifiers, so ideas about God can be anchored in our own experience and then be shown to be different to us proportionally. We won’t ever know the actual nature of God, but when we use qualifiers like ‘infinitely’ and ‘perfectly’ we introduce ideas beyond our imagination, therefore avoiding presenting an anthropomorphic

Challenge to analogy- William Blackstone

Analogy is not helpful because we have to translate analogies into univocal language before they mean anything. There are no comparisons that can be helped by analogy, it is meanignless to compare the pain of toothache to the pain of a damaged ankle, pain is pain.

Challenge to analogy- Hume

Analogy only works if the two thinhs being compared are similar

God is transcendent and wholly other abd possibly completely unknowable, so analogy is an inadequate method for talking about God.

It makes statements abotu God meaningless

Challenge to analogy- Otto

Claimed the otherness of God (mysterium, tremendum et fascinans) should be shown through language

other challenges to analogy

-Aquinas and Ramsey both assume the existence of God

-Analogy is still unclear, doesn’t tell us much and only give partial answer

-May have no basis in fact, e.g. referring to God as ‘Father’ may have no basis to be referred to as this.

Support for the use of analogy- C. Stephens Evans

There is nothing wrong with accepting God as mysterious

Analogy allows us to use language from the observable world while avoiding literalism

Other support for use of analogy

-God revelaed himself to humanity and so is knowable in some capacity, and so therefore use of analogy is justified

-Comparisons can give us some insight into the nature of God

-We use analigy everyday

-Some analogies work e.g God the Father tells us something about the relationship with God which shows care and love

-Helps non believers understand some religious ideas

-Allows us to use language and concepts we are familiar with, Aquinas was not trying to give us a complete description, but a partial description of God is better than no description at all