This topic explores the philosophical challenges surrounding religious language, examining whether it is cognitive or non-cognitive, and evaluating various
Topic Synopsis
This topic explores the philosophical challenges surrounding religious language, examining whether it is cognitive or non-cognitive, and evaluating various theories on how religious statements function, including verification, falsification, analogy, symbolism, myth, and language games.
Key Concepts & Core Principles
- Verification Principle: The logical positivist claim that a statement is meaningful only if it is analytically true or empirically verifiable. Religious language fails this test, making it literally meaningless (Ayer).
- Falsification Principle: Antony Flew's challenge that religious statements are not falsifiable (no evidence could count against them), so they 'die the death of a thousand qualifications' and become vacuous.
- Eschatological Verification: John Hick's response that religious claims about an afterlife are verifiable in principle (after death), so they are meaningful even if not verifiable now.
- Language Games: Wittgenstein's idea that meaning is determined by use within a specific 'form of life'. Religious language is meaningful within its own context, not judged by scientific standards.
- Analogy and Symbol: Aquinas's doctrine of analogy (univocal, equivocal, analogical) and Tillich's view that religious language is symbolic, participating in the reality it represents.
Exam Tips & Revision Strategies
- Ensure you can clearly define 'cognitive' and 'non-cognitive' as these are foundational to the debate
- When discussing Logical Positivism, always mention the self-refuting nature of the verification principle
- Use specific examples for each theory (e.g., 'God is good' for analogy, 'the burning house' for myth)
- Structure evaluation by comparing the strengths and weaknesses of each theory against the others
- Link the discussion of language games to the coherence theory of truth
Common Misconceptions & Mistakes to Avoid
- Confusing cognitive and non-cognitive language definitions
- Failing to distinguish between the verification and falsification challenges
- Misunderstanding the role of 'bliks' in Hare's response to falsification
- Over-simplifying the difference between Aquinas's analogy and Tillich's symbolism
- Treating 'myth' as synonymous with 'falsehood' rather than a complex form of communication
Examiner Marking Points
- Understanding of the distinction between cognitive and non-cognitive language
- Knowledge of the Logical Positivist challenge (verification principle)
- Knowledge of the falsification challenge (Antony Flew)
- Understanding of analogical language (Aquinas: proportion and attribution)
- Understanding of symbolic language (Randall and Tillich)
- Understanding of mythical language as a transmitter of values
- Understanding of language games (Wittgenstein)
- Ability to evaluate the effectiveness of these theories in resolving the problems of religious language