Ludwig Wittgenstein EARLY: PICTURE THEORY LATER: LANGUAGE GAMES

Wittgenstein It is debatable whether or not he wrote specifically about religious language, though his ideas have significantly influenced religious language. In Wittgenstein’s Tractatus, he influenced the Vienna Circle, proposing that the problems in philosophy were actually problems with language. He also developed picture theory of language. Language gives a pictoral representation of the world.

Early: Picture Theory (Logical Positivist view) Language corresponds to a state of affairs in the world Language can only be meaningful if it used in relation to what we see in the world Language is a way of representing facts “The cat is on the mat”

Later: Language Games Criticised Vienna Circle – our language is far richer & more diverse than LP allow. He developed a post-modern view of language. Multiplicity of language: Give orders, tell jokes, describe, report, ask, thank, curse, greet, pray etc If we want to know the meaning of the language, we need to know how it is being used – “meaning is use”

The context of language Language activity is governed by certain rules – according to the context in which it is used. One use of a particular word is not better than another Language is meaningful if it is understood in the correct context The mistake made by Ayer etc is to treat all language as if it was all part of the same game. DRIBBLE DRAW TRY

Religious Language Believers are all players of the same “game” They use the same language in the same context They understand the context in which the language is used To understand it, we must also play the game – be in that particular “form of life”.

In Philosophical Investigations (1936) LW suggested a postmodern understanding of language: All language is a game and in every ‘form of life’ words are used within the context of the subject area or game. All ‘forms of life’ have their own language and have their own rules concerning meaning – medical language is understood by doctors, but not bakers The language in the game is not about making true statements for everyone, but about communicating meaning to other people in the same game. These statements do not have to be meaningful to anyone else outside the game. Each game has its own ‘criteria of coherence’ which can only be understood by playing the right game by the right rules.

“God Exists” Meaning of Language Wittgenstein recognises the meaning behind this statement. To a religious believer this statement means more than “there is a god”. It is a positive affirmation that they are entering into a life of faith. When a religious believer makes this statement, they are confirming their belief in God as a reality in their life – a declaration of faith Unless you are a believer, you cannot understand what this means.

Anti Realism Wittgenstein’s approach to language is Anti-Realist. What is meaningful is what is “true for me” Whether God does or does not have external reality does not matter Religious faith is an affirmative decision to “enter the game” & therefore find meaning in the language that is used accordingly Truth is relative

Wittgenstein Explain Wittgenstein’s influence on the Vienna Circle. Describe in your own words what Wittgenstein meant by language games. Explain the problem raised by a believer and non-believer playing different language games. Is Language Game Theory a useful approach to talking about God? Refer to some of the key strengths & weaknesses.

D. Z. Philips and Religious Language Games The philosopher D. Z. Philips takes the language game theory and applies it to Religious language. Statements such as “God is Love” and discussions of Religious Experience are to be understood within their language game. As such it can only be judged by those who accept the rules. As such, it is argued, the Religious Language is meaningful to those who genuinely use it.

Wittgenstein Explain Wittgenstein’s influence on the Vienna Circle. Describe in your own words what Wittgenstein meant by language games. Explain the problem raised by a believer and non-believer playing different language games. How did D Z Phillips develop Wittgenstein’s ideas. Is Language Game Theory a useful approach to talking about God? Refer to some of the key strengths & weaknesses.

Evaluating Language Games STRENGTHS: It highlights the non-cognitive nature of religious language It distinguishes it from other forms of language It provides boundaries for the uses of language Statements are judged within their context – they are not inherently true or false Believers can learn the rules of religious language. Religious language games defend religion against criticism from other ‘forms of life’ because truth is dependent upon which game the person is in WEAKNESSES: Believers’ claims cannot be empirically tested Religious language is only for those inside the game It alienates people not initiated into the rules of the game Religious statements do aim to correspond with reality – God, Judgement & Afterlife are real to a believer, they are not simply ideas. Language games suffer from the logical problem of the excluded middle. (Either something has a quality, or the negative of the quality. Either I am a man, or I am not a man, I cannot be both at the same time’.