analogies AO2 weaknesses

what does Swinburne argue?

Univocal language about God is possible God is good in a different way from humans but it is still the same quality

what is an argument against analogies?

How do we know that the comparisons are reasonable or correct?

what can we not claim?

We still cannot claim to be saying anything factual about God

what can we not know?

How much we should scale any comparison of worldly things to God

If God is causally related to the world what would we be able to compare God to?

Can compare evil in the world analogically to God

what assumption do analogies rely on?

There is an existent God to talk about. Such claims are not verifiable or falsifiable

when is there no basis for analogies?

If we question whether humans were created in God’s image

How does Brummer object to Aquinas’ analogy of proportion?

it claims that a being has a quality to a certain degree relative to its nature - Brummer points out that we do not know God's nature so we cannot know the way in which God is loving - we are merely saying that God is not loving in the way humans are loving , but we cannot say in what way God is loving

what is a quote from Brummer?

‘The analogy of proportionalioty thus takes us no further than a negative theology’

what is a defense to this?

The analogy of attribution is meant to deal with this issue , if we can say that God's love is analogous to human love , we can the further add that God has love proportional to his nature

How does Brummer criticise the analogy of attribution?

Attribution can tell us that God is the source of human qualities , but it cannot tell us in what way God has those qualities - analogies do not enable us to say u in what way God is loving

How would Brummer approach be unsuccessful?

Aquinas’ goal is to say what God's qualities are like , to assert that there is a likeness between God's qualities and ours

what does Pseudo-Dionyisus argue?

God is completely beyond our understanding , so we cannot possibly talk about God is and his nature , God is beyond language

what else did Pseudo-Dionyisus argue?

God cannot be described in positive terms i.e by saying what God is , he can only be described negatively or via negativa - by saying what God is not e.g God is not living

what is a weakness of this?

God is described in positive terms in the Bible - e.g he is described having a ‘face’ or ‘walking’ in the garden of Eden