Cognitivism and Non-cognitive language

Cognitivism and non-cognitivism are theories about language

Language can be cognitive or non-cognitive

Cognitivism

Language is cognitive when it conveys information about reality. Cognitive statements make truth-claims: they can be either true or false and are, in principle, capable of being empirically tested or verified. When language pictures the world we live in. e.g. Koala's live in trees and eat eucalyptus leaves

Non-cognitivism

Non-cognitive statements do not convey factual information. Instead, they express emotions, attitudes, or feelings, issues commands, or articulate what’s and are not capable of being true or false.

Cognitivism and Religious Language

some philosophers argue that religious language is cognitive, meaning it is descriptive and makes claims about reality e.g. Hick.

Statements such as “there is a soul” or “salvation comes through grace” are intended to describe how things actually are and therefore can be either true or false.

On this view, religious statements are true if they correspond with or care here to reality and false if they do not.

Non-cognitivism and religious language

Some philosopher’s argue that religious language is non-cognitive, meaning it does not describe facts but instead expresses attitudes, emotions or feelings e.g. logical positivists like Schlock or Flew.

Because attitudes cannot be true or false, religious statements are not the kind of claims that can be tested or evaluated for truth.

For example, if someone is frustrated and exclaims “Ahhhh!” it would make no sense to describe this utterance as true or false.

In the same way, non-cognitivists argue that religious statements function more like expressions of feeling than factual anssertations and therefore do not convey objective information about reality.