/
‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent ‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent

‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent - PowerPoint Presentation

karlyn-bohler
karlyn-bohler . @karlyn-bohler
Follow
409 views
Uploaded On 2016-08-02

‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent - PPT Presentation

What did we discuss yesterday Is Peter Vardy making a category mistake The truth of an antirealist claim is based on coherence God exists is true not because God refers to an everlasting being or timeless substance but rather because the phrase God exists has a use and purp ID: 429788

god language exists

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent.’

What did we discuss yesterday?Slide2

Is Peter Vardy making a category mistake?

The truth of an anti-realist claim is based on coherence. ‘God exists’ is true not because ‘God’ refers to an everlasting being or timeless substance, but rather because the phrase ‘God exists’ has a use and purpose within the form of life of the believing community

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a statement of ontology?

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a religious statement of authority against another religion?Slide3

Is Peter Vardy making a category mistake

?

The truth of an

anti-realist claim is based on coherence

. ‘God exists’ is true not because ‘God’ refers to an everlasting being or timeless substance, but rather because the phrase ‘God exists’

has a use

and purpose within the

form of life

of the believing community

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a statement of ontology?

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a religious statement of authority against another religion?

??????

??????

??????

??????Slide4

Is Peter Vardy making a category mistake?

The truth of an anti-realist claim is based on coherence. ‘God exists’ is true not because ‘God’ refers to an everlasting being or timeless substance, but rather because the phrase ‘God exists’ has a use and purpose within the form of life of the believing community

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a statement of ontology?

Is there a category mistake to assume that “God exists” is not a religious statement of authority against another religion?Slide5

What does this guy say about religious language? What is he most concerned with?

Don’t ask for the meaning, ask for the use.Slide6

DZ Phillips and Wittgenstein. How are they linked according to this quote?

Some of the problems caused by religious language exist because we take the language literally. The concept of ‘soul’ for instance is problematic if we look for an actual non-physical thing at the core of our being that will survive death. Slide7

It highlights the non-cognitive nature of religious language. (Allegorical, metaphoric or simply talking of something outside of empirical understanding.)

It distinguishes it from other types of language. Accepts religious language as being distinct in its own game but with wider,

eschatalogical

, implications.

Language games provide boundaries for the correct use of language.

Believers can be initiated into the rules of language. The language is accessible and so can gain meaning.

Language games defend language against criticisms from other ‘forms of life’. Therefore truth is understood as relative and statements are to be judged against their context and not on whether they are inherently or objectively true or false.

Language games do not allow for believers’ claims to be empirically tested. it leaves statements unchallenged and unchallengeable opening the way for anything to be said and justified leading to meaningless statements.

Religious language alienates those outside the game. If you are not part of a particular form of life you are not privy to the language and its protocols leading to misunderstanding.

The rules of the game cannot be changed to allow outsiders in

meaning outsiders must adapt to the game and its rules not visa-versa.

Language GamesSlide8

What are your concluding thoughts on Witt?Slide9

How far do you agree with Vardy?

‘In finding the value of religious language, the individual finds God. Believers do not discover religious truths – they make them.’Slide10

What can we now say about religious language?

There is no single theory that satisfies everyone. Religious language is highly complex and, though it gives us no definitive truth, nevertheless it offers revealing insights into the nature of human existence and the quest to find, and understand, God

Ayer

Hick

Witt

Phillips

VardySlide11

What might an exam question look like on this?Slide12

What might an exam question look like on this?Slide13

Plan your essay!! LINE OF ARGUMENT

I’M NOT MAKING THIS STUFF UP!!!