Ayer & the Weak Verification Principle LO’s: 1: To understand the ideas of A.J. Ayer 2: To consider how he developed the verification principle LO’s: 1:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Michael Lacewing Religious belief Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Advertisements

© Michael Lacewing A priori knowledge Michael Lacewing
Empiricism on a priori knowledge
Anthony Flew and A. J. Ayer
Verificationism and religious language Michael Lacewing
Pragmatism: metaphysics is meaningful only if it has practical consequences What we mean by reality is the product of our ideas and ideals, all of which.
What do you see? According to logical positivism, do your statements have meaning? What do you see? According to logical positivism, do your statements.
Religious Language Michael Lacewing
LO: I will consider the falsification principle’s effect on religious language Hmk: Read Mark Vernon article on ‘The Via Negative’ before tomorrow’s lesson.
Introduction to A2 Philosophy Homework: Background reading – ‘Questions about God.’ – Chapter 4 – God and Language, by Patrick J. Clarke.
Task: Take a look at the following statements: “I am the bread of life” “I am the true vine” “I am the way, the truth and the life” “I am the resurrection.
This is the beginning of the “The Jabberwocky” by Lewis Carrol.
Epistemology revision Responses: add a ‘no false lemmas’ condition (J+T+B+N) Responses: replace ‘justified’ with ‘reliably formed’ (R+T+B) (reliabilism)
Introduction to Ethics Lecture 6 Ayer and Emotivism By David Kelsey.
Religious Language Speaking about God Part 1. Why Religious language? The concept of a God is: Something other Something timeless We talk of things using.
Michael Lacewing Emotivism Michael Lacewing
The Verification Principle & Religious Language The Logical Positivists, led by the philosophers of the Vienna Circle and then further developed by A.J.Ayer.
“God talk is evidently non-sense” A.J. Ayer. Ayer is a logical positivist – a member of the Vienna Circle. Any claim made about God (including Atheistic)
Ludwig Wittgenstein EARLY: PICTURE THEORY LATER: LANGUAGE GAMES.
Ethical and religious language Michael Lacewing
Religious Language  Language is about communication  Religious language is a means of communicating about religion  This can be within three contexts:
Epistemology Revision
This is the beginning of the “The Jabberwocky” by Lewis Carrol.
Meta-Ethics Non-Cognitivism.
LO: I will know how thinkers have solved the problem of speaking meaningfully about God by making negative statements of what God is not.
Proof and Probability (can be applied to arguments for the existence of God)
Rachel Petrik Based on writing by A.J. Ayer
Epistemology revision Concept empiricist arguments against concept innatism:  Alternative explanations (no such concept or concept re- defined as based.
Is it possible to verify statements about God? The Logical Positivists would say no – God is a metaphysical being and it is impossible to empirically verify.
Language Games L/O: To understand and be able to explain clearly what is meant by the term Language Games Starter: Recapping Myth and Symbol. Get into.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 1-a What is philosophy? By David Kelsey.
Certainty and Truths.
Can religious language be meaningful? Today’s lesson will be successful if you can: Explain the Verification Principle Critique the Verification Principle.
HUME: Advocating a “mitigated skepticism”. Let’s review this… My next door neighbors consist of a bachelor and his wife. Can you consider this statement.
It is now generally admitted, at any rate by philosophers, that the existence of a being having the attributes which define the god of any non-animistic.
Criticisms of Flew Possible responses Hare – religious statements are unfalsifiable and non-cognitive but still play a useful role in life (parable of.
Michael Lacewing Religious belief Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Religious language: cognitive or non-cognitive?
The ontological argument
O.A. so far.. Anselm – from faith, the fool, 2 part argument
The Ontological Argument
Religious responses to the verification principle
Verificationism on religious language
Arguments and Proofs Learning Objective:
Ludwig Wittgenstein EARLY: PICTURE THEORY LATER: LANGUAGE GAMES.
Religious Language as cognitive, but meaningless
The philosophical problems of the verification principle
Religious Language.
RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE.
Reading material Articles: Tillich on symbols & Aquinas on analogy questions 1. What is art? 2. Does it open up new levels of reality for you? 3. Does.
Welcome back to Religious Studies
The Ontological Argument
Recap Task Complete the summary sheet to recap the various arguments and ideas of cognitive ethical language:
Did King Harold die at the battle of Hastings?
THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.
Is this statement meaningful?
4 B Criticisms of the verification and falsification principles
The Verification Principle
RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE.
Flying pig spotted in Amazon Jungle…
Discussion: Can one meaningfully talk of a transcendent metaphysical God acting (creating sustaining, being loving) in a physical empirical world? Ayer.
The Ontological Argument
‘A triangle has three sides’
Religious Language as cognitive, but meaningless
‘Torture is Good’ How does that phrase make you feel?
Do these phrases describe: Meta or Normative ethics?
Is murder wrong? A: What is murder? B: What is the law on murder in the UK? A: Do you think murder is wrong? B: Do you think murder is wrong? ‘Garment.
By the end of today’s lesson you will
Verification and meaning
A guide for the perplexed (who think it is all meaningless)
Presentation transcript:

Ayer & the Weak Verification Principle LO’s: 1: To understand the ideas of A.J. Ayer 2: To consider how he developed the verification principle LO’s: 1: To understand the ideas of A.J. Ayer 2: To consider how he developed the verification principle Lesson 3 HWK TASK 3 in your HWK REligious Language Booklet (pg.6). HWK TASK 3 in your HWK REligious Language Booklet (pg.6). Starter for 5! Come up with a statement that is: tautological false by definition verifiable and true verifiable and false meaningless Swap with a partner! Can they identify them correctly? Starter for 5! Come up with a statement that is: tautological false by definition verifiable and true verifiable and false meaningless Swap with a partner! Can they identify them correctly? Keyword Metaphysics: literally meaning ‘above or beyond physics’, metaphysics concerns questions concerning being and ultimate reality.

20 th Century British Philosopher! The most famous advocate of the verification principle. Most famous book: Language, Truth and Logic (published at age 25). Fact File: A.J.Ayer In Language, Truth and Logic Ayer: Accepts the a priori/a posteriori division emphasised by thinkers like Hume and Kant Wishes to follow Hume and the thinkers of the Vienna Circle in rejecting metaphysics as meaningless (not factually significant). Ayers criteria: Must be a tautology (a priori), have practical verifiability or be verifiable in principle (a posteriori). Making Links: Look back at the arguments for the existence of God considered at AS. Which are a priori and which are a posteriori?

The idea of a Verification Principle faces a number of serious problems. How much can we really verify? For example: did King Harold die at the battle of Hastings? We can look at some historical records which say he did, but we cannot (a) observe it ourselves, or (b) subject the hypothesis to any new or further forms of testing. Perhaps a lot of what we take for knowledge defies strict verification. A Problem in Verification To get around this problem, Ayer developed the ‘Weak Verification Principle’. Instead of checking every bit of knowledge with our logic or senses, he suggested that we might know things by setting up sensible standards for evidence – eye-witness accounts, multiple sources, etc. Perhaps Harold did die after all … To get around this problem, Ayer developed the ‘Weak Verification Principle’. Instead of checking every bit of knowledge with our logic or senses, he suggested that we might know things by setting up sensible standards for evidence – eye-witness accounts, multiple sources, etc. Perhaps Harold did die after all …

Verifiability… Maths (a priori) Tautology (analytic – a priori) Practical Verifiability (synthetic) Verifiability in Principle (synthetic) Pure logic e.g. 2+2=4 A logical statement which we can know to be true by definition. e.g. ‘Bachelors are male’ This is verifiable as it would be illogical to think the opposite. Statements which could be tested in reality. e.g. ‘Liverpool Football Club wear red shirts.’ This is verifiable in practice – we can go and watch a match. Statements which we cannot verify in practice, but know what observations would lead it to be true. They can be shown to be probable by observation and experience. e.g. ‘There is life on other planets in the Milky Way Galaxy’ or ‘All humans are mortal’ In practice we do not have the technology to visit all the planets in the Milky Way. Nor can we kill all the humans in the world. + =

Task 1 of 2 : Lets go back to the bin... Which statements can we now rescue through Ayer’s weak verification principle? Henry the VIII had 6 wives The criterion which we use to test the genuineness of apparent statements of fact is the criterion of verifiability. We say that a sentence is factually significant to any given person, if, and only if, he knows what observations would lead him, under certain conditions, to accept the proposition as being true, or reject it as being false. God is all- loving Van Gogh was a good painter Gravity is constant at all place on earth Da Vinchi’s ‘Last Supper’ is more beautiful than the picture drawn by my 5 year old niece The cat is in the hat All bachelors are men All ravens are black Salt is made up of Sodium and Chlorine Triangles have 3 sides Which of the weaknesses of the verification principle would still apply to Ayer’s version?

Him again … Statement: ‘God is loving and powerful’ … Analytically verifiable? Synthetically verifiable? … Therefore Ayer would say: MEANINGLESS “No sentence which describes the nature of a transcendent God can possess any literal significance.” Non - Cognitive

Cognitive (Realist) Language:  Factual statements  Proved true or false via empirical evidence Non-Cognitive (Anti-Realist) Language:  Cannot be verified but nor can they be falsified through empirical evidence.  Context dependant and can include symbols, myths, metaphor, feelings. THESE STATEMENTS

Task 2 of 2 Group Tasks: To be Peer Assessed Each Group will cREate a poster on A.J. Ayer and the verification principle! Include: – His aims in Language, Truth and Logic – Where Ayer differs from the Vienna Circle – Implications for art, politics, religion and ethics – Criticisms of the weak verification principle Each Group will cREate a poster on A.J. Ayer and the verification principle! Include: – His aims in Language, Truth and Logic – Where Ayer differs from the Vienna Circle – Implications for art, politics, religion and ethics – Criticisms of the weak verification principle For display! Further Research: Find out more about Hick’s story of ‘The Road to the Celestial City’ and his idea of eschatological verification. Using pages 14-15

Consolidation: Peer Assessment Look at each others posters! Did they Include: – His aims in Language, Truth and Logic – Where Ayer differs from the Vienna Circle – Implications for art, politics, religion and ethics – Criticisms of the weak verification principle – Further Research: Find out more about Hick’s story of ‘The Road to the Celestial City’ and his idea of eschatological verification. Look at each others posters! Did they Include: – His aims in Language, Truth and Logic – Where Ayer differs from the Vienna Circle – Implications for art, politics, religion and ethics – Criticisms of the weak verification principle – Further Research: Find out more about Hick’s story of ‘The Road to the Celestial City’ and his idea of eschatological verification. On a Post-It note: 1.EBI: Give them an extra piece of information that would develop their work further. 2.Give them a WWW! On a Post-It note: 1.EBI: Give them an extra piece of information that would develop their work further. 2.Give them a WWW!