LO: I will know how thinkers have solved the problem of speaking meaningfully about God by making negative statements of what God is not
Logical positivism Vienna Circle Verification Principle Falsification The belief that statements are only meaningful if they can be verified by the senses. There are strong and weak forms of the principle generally associated with the Vienna Circle and A. J. Ayer ( ) respectively. Strong – applied to anything that can be verified conclusively by observation and experience. Weak – refers to statements that can be shown to be probable by observation and experience. A movement in philosophy that believed that the aim of philosophers should be the analysis of language, particularly the language of science. They believe that that propositions only have meaning if they can be verified empirically. The group of philosophers including Schlick ( ) and Neurath ( ) who gave rise to the logical positivist movement. If there is no way of disproving a statement, then it is meaningless
Select any object in the room (without telling the person next to you what it is.) Have a go at describing it to them by saying what it is not. What did we learn from this activity?
God is transcendent so you cannot say what God is. However, you can clearly say what God is not. Via negativa literally means the ‘negative way.’
Take the Mark Vernon article, ‘On seriously doubting the existence of God.’ Read through it and answer the following questions: What is the Via Negativa Where did the idea of Via Negativa come from? As you are reading, note down your own responses to what you read. Do you agree/disagree? Why? What are the implications for what is being said for Theists/Athests, etc?
Well… it’s not cancer, not a heart attack, not liver failure...
C. S. Lewis, in his book Miracles, advocates the use of negative theology when first thinking about God, in order to cleanse our minds of misconceptions. He goes on to say we must then refill our minds with the truth about God, untainted by mythology, bad analogies or false mind-pictures.
Strengths It prevents anthropomorphic statements being made about God It can be seen as more respectful. We are not reducing God to our level of understanding. Some argue that the Via Negativa is the best way for conveying the idea of a transcendent God Weaknesses It still results in a limited understanding. What are we actually left with if all we can talk about are negative statements? The Via Negativa is not a true reflection of how religious people speak of God. They do not talk in the negative but rather seek positive knowledge of what God is. The Via Negativa claims that no positive statement about God can be made. Surely that in itself must be a positive statement?
Can you define the following? To use language univocally and equivocally Cognitive and non-cognitive statements Analytic and Synthetic statements Tautology Metaphysics Eschatology Blik Anthropomorphism
So far we have covered: 1. The Vienna Circle, Logical Positivism and the Verification principle 2. Difficulties with the Verification Principle 3. Weak Verification Principle (Ayer) 4. Criticisms of the Weak verification principle 5. The Falsification Principle (Flew, the response of Hare [blik] and Mitchell) 6. The Via Negativa and strengths and weaknesses
‘Religious Language is meaningless.’ Discuss (35 marks)
Students take the ‘hot-seat’ and answer questions from the class about the topic on Religious Language