FLEW AND HARE - OVERVIEW

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Anthony Flew and A. J. Ayer
Advertisements

The Religious Hypothesis
Religious language: Flew, Hare and Mitchell
Verificationism and religious language Michael Lacewing
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.
By Thomas Marsh & Dominic Wills Myth.  TThe myth is the most complex type of symbolic language, since it incorporates symbols, metaphors and models.
Epistemology revision Responses: add a ‘no false lemmas’ condition (J+T+B+N) Responses: replace ‘justified’ with ‘reliably formed’ (R+T+B) (reliabilism)
Rationality of Religious Belief Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang.
The Cosmological Argument. This is an a posteriori argument There are many versions of it It is based on observation and understanding of the universe.
The Cosmological Argument (Causation or ‘first cause’ theory)
Morality and Religion. Does morality depend on religion?
“There is only one God, but there are many different ways to know God
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.
John Wisdom’s Parable of the Gardener AS Philosophy God and the World – Seeing as hns adapted from richmond.
Give definitions Give an opinion and justify that opinion Explain religious attitudes Respond to a statement – 2 sides.
My Philosophy teacher wants to kill me! Ellie: I think Karen is going to kill me. Rosie: She doesn’t seem that bad to me; she never acts like she hates.
Criticisms of Flew Possible responses Hare – religious statements are unfalsifiable and non-cognitive but still play a useful role in life (parable of.
Test 1.Where did the logical positivists meet? 2.Explain the meaning of cognitive and non-cognitive 4.Define an analytic statement 5.Define a synthetic.
Effective participator Atheism and the Media Richard Dawkins Aim: To understand what Richard Dawkins says about religion(L4). Goal: To consider the factors.
Michael Lacewing Religious belief Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Religious language: cognitive or non-cognitive?
OA: Faith and Reason What difference does the argument make
Quiz: How Humanist Are You?
ATHEISM & AGNOSTICISM HUMANISM - KS3
Donovan – Overview Philosophy A2.
How do humanists decide what to believe?
Religious language: the University debate
The Falsification Principle
Challenges to the falsification principle
Religious responses to the verification principle
Spiritual Opportunity Questions
THE VIA NEGATIVE STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Summarise the Verification Principle in 20 words
Is this conversation meaningful or meaningless?
RM Hare - The Parable of the Paranoid Lunatic
RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE.
THEOLOGY AND FALSIFICATION
1 - FLEW AND THE PARABLE OF THE GARDENER
THEOLOGY AND FALSIFICATION
Religion and the natural sciences
Religious language as non-cognitive and mythical:
THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.
Moral Arguments for the existence and non-existence of God
4 B Criticisms of the verification and falsification principles
Religious language Myths
RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE.
MITCHELL - INTRODUCTION
MITCHELL AND FLEW - OVERVIEW
How did we prove that the world was not flat?
THEOLOGY AND FALSIFICATION
The Falsification Principle
What point is it trying to make?
THEOLOGY AND FALSIFICATION
What point is it trying to make?
What point is it trying to make?
What is an ARGUMENT? An argument is a reasoned, logical way of demonstrating that the writer’s position, belief, or conclusion is valid. Arguments seek.
What point is it trying to make?
Chapter 11: Errors of Expression
‘A triangle has three sides’
THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.
‘Torture is Good’ How does that phrase make you feel?
What has this got to do with religious language?
Miracles – A Comparative Study of Two Key Scholars
Christianity (pages 11-25) Science (pages 34-48)
Chapter 1 About Science.
A guide for the perplexed (who think it is all meaningless)
Ethics, Philosophy and Religion
Philosopher’s Views on
Presentation transcript:

FLEW AND HARE - OVERVIEW Parable of the Gardener Despite the evidence, the believer refuses to accept that there is no gardener and just changes his ideas so that they still fit. Qualification When someone refuses to accept that they might be wrong and just modifies their story to fit with new evidence. Interpretations of Religious Language Liberal – stories with a meaning. Traditional – factually true. Assertions If a person will not allow their ideas to be falsified (ie, proved wrong) then these ideas are not based on facts and are therefore meaningless. Example of the Dying Child Flew doesn't say it explicitly, but his conclusion is that, if a believer maintains a belief in a loving God REGARDLESS of what happens, then that belief is a meaningless belief. HARE Parable of the Paranoid Student A student who is convinced that all of his professors are trying to kill him. His friends present him with evidence for why he is mistaken but the student refuses to take it on board and qualifies his belief instead. Bliks A blik is the way in which someone views the world. A blik is a bit like a gut feeling, it is not based on facts. This means that you can't contradict a blik with more facts. Hume Asserts that bliks are our foundation for how we view the world Science and Religion Only scientific statements need to be falsifiable and Hare has shown that religious statements aren't like scientific statements. Atheists Says that some atheists might genuinely abandon the religious blik. Hare thinks that the religious blik has kept evil urges restrained, but these will express themselves once the religious blik is abandoned. Detachment Argues that religious questions have a direct impact on how a person lives their life whereas the same is not true of scientific ones. It is therefore not appropriate to apply the same rules of ‘what is meaningful?’ to both disciplines.

Parable of the Gardener Despite the evidence, the believer refuses to accept that there is no gardener and just changes his ideas so that they still fit. Interpretations of Religious Language Qualification When someone refuses to accept that they might be wrong and just modifies their story to fit with new evidence. Assertions

Liberal – stories with a meaning. Traditional – factually true. Example of the Dying Child Flew doesn't say it explicitly, but his conclusion is that, if a believer maintains a belief in a loving God REGARDLESS of what happens, then that belief is a meaningless belief. If a person will not allow their ideas to be falsified (ie, proved wrong) then these ideas are not based on facts and are therefore meaningless. Parable of the Paranoid Student A student who is convinced that all of his professors are trying to kill him. His friends present him with evidence for why he is mistaken but the student refuses to take it on board and qualifies his belief instead.

Asserts that bliks are our foundation for how we view the world A blik is the way in which someone views the world. A blik is a bit like a gut feeling, it is not based on facts. This means that you can't contradict a blik with more facts. Argues that religious questions have a direct impact on how a person lives their life whereas the same is not true of scientific ones. It is therefore not appropriate to apply the same rules of ‘what is meaningful?’ to both disciplines. Hume Asserts that bliks are our foundation for how we view the world Detachment

HARE FLEW Science and Religion Only scientific statements need to be falsifiable and Hare has shown that religious statements aren't like scientific statements. HARE Atheists Says that some atheists might genuinely abandon the religious blik. Hare thinks that the religious blik has kept evil urges restrained, but these will express themselves once the religious blik is abandoned. FLEW