Twentieth Century Perspectives - Religious Language

What is the Verification Principle?

belief that statements are only meaningful if they can be verified by the senses

What are strong & weak forms of verification generally associated with?

• Vienna Circle

• A.J. Ayler

What do verificationists argue about religious statements?

religious statements are meaningless as they cannot be empirically checked

How did Hume influence Verificationism?

Suggested two areas of knowledge; a priori knowledge and a posteriori knowledge

• rejects metaphysics including discussion of God as it can be neither of the above

How did Wittgenstein influence Verificationism?

Famously said - “whereas one cannot speak, one must remain silent”

• suggested that focusing on languages would provide a way forward for philosophers

What is The Vienna Circle?

group of philosophers who met in the 1920s and 1930s

• argued that some statements are meaningful and others were not

How does The Vienna Circle apply the Verification Principle?

Scientific claims about the world are meaningful, but religious and ethical claims are not

How is The Vienna Circle’s Verification Principle limited?

This form of the verification principle seems to rule out discussion of a number of areas that cannot be verified

• includes historical statements, discussions of scientific laws (we cannot verify that they always apply) and claims about art or beauty

What was Ayler’s Verificationism?

To be meaningful it must be either tautology (something that is true by definition) or something that is verifiable in principle

How does Ayler’s Verificationism distinguish him from the Vienna Circle?

It is the verifiable in principle that distinguishes Ayler from the Vienna Circle

• not required to conclusively prove something by direct observation - we merely have to be able to say how it would be possible to verify it

What example did Ayler use to explain his Verificationism?

‘There are mountains on the far side of the moon’

(which at the time of his writings could not be verified)

• Netherless it is a meaningful statement as if we were to orbit the moon we would be able to verify this claim

What does Tautology mean?

a phase where the same thing is said twice in different words

• e.g. three-sided triangle

What is Metaphysics?

the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of reality

• literally things ‘beyond’ or ‘after’ the physical realm

What is Ayler’s main idea with his Verificationism?

Words get their meaning by referring to things in our shared experience, or by being true by definition

• if a word connects to the world, that connection should be verifiable

What statements would Ayler’s Verificationism reject?

If a statement cannot be shown to be about anything then we cannot grant its factual cognitive meaning

• e.g. if someone uses language, but cannot show what this word refers to

For Ayler what ensures that language is meaningful?

Cognitive and Analytical or verifiable

What does Ayler conclude about God?

God is a metaphysical term - no way to empirically verify it

• Ayler concludes that he’s not even an atheist, since an atheist says they do not believe in God, but that still gives the word meaning

What is Ayler’s Verification Principle typically referred to as?

Weak Verification

Who created the Weak Verification Principle?

Ayler

What does the Weak Verification Principle conclude?

To be meaningful, language must be either a tautology or something verifiable in principle

• meaningful if its logical to assume we can verify it at a later point

How is Ayler’s Verification Principle successful?

• widens what is meaningful to discussions of historical claims and scientific laws

• religious and ethical claims are rightly executed - different to other types of statements

• softens that demand for absolute verification of a statement (weak verification)

What’s Ayler’s famous quote?

“What observations would lead him, under certain conditions, to accept the proposition as being true or rejected it as being false”

What is a criticism of the Vienna Circle’s Verification Principle?

Strong form of verification is too rigid

• absurd for some historical claims e.g. Julius Caesar coming to Britain to be classed as meaningless

How does Swinburne criticise Ayler?

Not right to rule out all religious statements

• noted that religious claims e.g. the resurrection of Jesus would be verifiable as true

What is Eschatology?

the part of theology that is concerned with death, judgement, and the final destiny of the soul and of mankind

Who created Eschatological Verification?

Hick

What was the Eschatological Verification a challenge of?

Ayler’s rejection of religious statements

What is Hick’s Eschatological Verificationism?

argument that religious statements are meaningful eschatologically

• after death it will be possible to verify God’s existence

What example did Hick use to describe his Eschatological Verificationism?

Two travellers on a road

• travellers argue about whether the road leads to the celestial city or whether the road just ends

• when they turn the final corner of the road - one of them will be proved right

What does Falsification mean?

principle that a statement is a genuine scientific assertion if it is possible to say how it could be disproved empirically

Who came up with the Falsification Symposium?

Flew

What is Flew’s Falsification Symposium?

refers to a series of articles written in the 1950s which included and responded to Antony Flew’s initial presentation of falsification

Who originally devised the falsification theory?

Popper

What was Popper’s original falsification theory?

test for what is science and what is merely pseudoscience (theory pretending to be scientific)

• scientific claims are testable - if they were false, you could prove them to be false

How did Popper use his original falsification theory to criticise Freud?

Criticised Freud’s psychology as not falsifiable (e.g. Oedipus Complex)

• if it cannot be subject to tests that would show how it could be false, then it is not a real scientific theory

• just pseudo-science

How did Flew apply Popper’s Falsification?

applied this principle to the use of religious language

• religious language cannot be falsified - this consideration means that religious statements are not statements at all

What example did Flew use to explain his Falsification Symposium?

Parable of the Garden

• one explorer believes there is a gardener, the other does not

• as they wait and watch, no gardener is found

• believer continues to argue that the garden exists but the story has now changed - he must be an invisible, intangible gardener who works in secret

What famous quote does Flew say regarding the Parable of the Gardener?

“But what remains of your original assertion?”

What is Flew’s conclusion about religious language?

Religious claims about the world aren’t really claims at all as they cannot be tested - not “genuine assertions”

• when challenged, the believer waters down their claim, shift the goal posts - so much so that they are not saying anything at all

• religious claims suffer “the death of a thousand qualifications”

What quote does Flew say regarding how religious language is unsuccessful?

“the death of a thousand qualifications”

How does Flew apply his Falsification Symposium to the Problem of Evil?

When a believer is challenged over their claim that ‘God loves people’ it reduces to ‘God loves people but allows free will, develops character, does not intervene, has a bigger plan, and moves in mysterious ways’

• Flew - how would this differ from there being no God at all?

How does Hick address Falsification?

Prefers verification as a test of religious statements

• verification & falsification are not opposites

If religious belief is true, it can be verified eschatologically, yet if it is false it cannot be shown to be false

• verification is a better test!

How does Swinburne address Falsification?

Questioned whether verification and falsification is the correct test for religious statements

• e.g. toys in the cupboard coming alive at night when no one is watching them

Although it is an unverifiable and unfalsifiable statement, it is meaningful as we can understand the claim it makes

How is Swinburne’s address to Falsification criticised?

Swinburne oversimplifies the issue

Who created the Parable of the Lunatic?

Hare

What is Hare’s Parable of the Lunatic?

• Lunatic is convinced that all the dons (professors) at the university want to kill him

• his friends encourage him to meet the kindest dons they can find

• however, this does not convince him

• lunatic replies that this shows just how cunning the dons are; they are trying to lore him into a false sense of security

What does Hare’s Parable of the Lunatic show?

Hare is attempting to defend religious beliefs - Flew misunderstands the language involved

• Flew is wrong to apply scientific criteria to theological language

Hare argues that we all have basic beliefs that he calls ‘blinks’

• some blinks are reasonable and some are not

Religious belief is a blink and as such cannot be empirically tested

Who influences Hare’s beliefs on Falsification?

Influenced by Wittgeinstein’s language games

How is Hare’s criticism of Flew’s Falsification successful?

If Hare is not right that religious belief is not scientific - allows religious statements to have meaning to the individual

• the challenge that Flew makes fails

How is Hare’s criticism of Flew’s Falsification unsuccessful?

Seems inadequate - believers claiming ‘God loves us’ are not just claiming a subjective truth

• they believe themselves to be making a claim about reality as a whole

Who created the Parable of the Partisan?

Mitchell

What is Mitchell’s Parable of the Partisan?

• in a war-torn country, a partisan (resistance fighter) meets a stranger who persuades him that he is the secret commander of the resistance despite sometimes working undercover

• afterwards, the stranger sometimes helps, but is also often seen in the uniform of the opposition handing over resistance fighters

• when challenged, the partisan says “the strangers knows best”

What can Mitchell’s Parable of the Partisan demonstrate about believers?

Faith and belief that believers have in God

What does Mitchell’s Parable of the Paristan show?

Mitchell partly accepts Flew’s points

• suggests that there is evidence that counts for and against belief: the believer recognises that the problem of evil is a problem

However, the believer does not allow the evidence to decisively count against beliefs

• they are not a detached observer but are committed by faith to truth God

How is Mitchell’s Parable of the Partisan more successful then Hare?

recognises the role of evidence - Hare does not

• if the believer is like Hare’s lunatic, then evidence is irrelevant

rejects the idea that religious beliefs are blinks

How does Mitchell’s Parable of the Partisan compare to Flew’s Falsification Symposium?

Supports Flew’s idea that religious statements are assertions are assertions or claims

• but, unlike Flew, sees a genuine role for faith

Who created the idea of Language Games?

Wittgenstein

What does Wittgenstein suggest that the aim of philosophy should be focused on?

Language - in order to save the problems of misunderstandings

• “Don’t ask for the meaning, ask for the use”

• Meaning of words are not rigid or fixed - importance is how the word is used

Use of language helps us to create our perspective of the world

What is the argument regarding Language Games?

Language is like playing a game with rules

What does Wittgenstein say about Language Games?

• within our communities we have agreed rules on how words are used

• Wittgenstein observes that religious language and the language of different religious groups is in itself an entirely different language game

What does Wittgenstein use the Problem of Evil to describe Language Games?

• if we were to say ‘God allows suffering to develop our character and we will be rewarded in heaven’ - cannot say that the statement is true in a literal sense, but it fits within a Christian interpretation of the world

• It is not a statement that fits within the Atheistic or Hindu language games, for instance

• to suggest that the best explanation of evil is that God does not exist would not fit within the rules of the games (like a swimmer choosing to use a boat)

What does Wittgenstein conclude about Religious Language?

For religious statements, there is not a difference of opinion where one viewpoint is right and one is wrong

• two different ways of seeing

What quote is Wittgenstein famously known for saying?

“Where one cannot speak, one should remain silent”

What are the strengths of Wittgenstein’s Language Games?

• recognises that religious and scientific statements are two different types of things - should be treated differently

• meaning is not fixed - changed with use and context

• recognises groundless beliefs; cannot necessarily provide reasons for them, yet they shape our world

How would scholars similar to Flew and Mitchell criticise Wittgenstein’s Language Games?

Believers may reject the idea that religious statements only have meaning to the individual

• see their claims are universal truths - believe themselves to be making cognitive statements

Why is Wittgenstein’s Language Games criticised as being circular?

Language game gives words their meaning - yet the game itself is just a collection of words

How does Gellner criticise Wittgeinstein?

Wittgenstein over-analyses language

• he “takes apart a perfectly working clock and then wonders why it doesn’t work”