what is the verification principle
establish the meaningfulness of language generally
what do logical positivists say about verification principle - 3
- language is meaningless without empirical evidence.
- conclude impossible to speak meaningfully about God - can’t be verified
- religious language is used to consider things beyond human experience
who made verification
A J Ayer
what is the argument
non cognitive meaningless
religious language not possible to prove a statement true or false
what are the 2 requirements to make a language meaningful - verification
- analytic or a priori - true by definition
- synthetic or a posteriori - empirically verifiable
what are the 2 definitions on how to language is shown to be flawed or redefined
what does pseudo proposition
- verification in practise
- verification in principle
anything other than these statements
what is a problem with verification principle
- principle can’t be verified using the principle so meaningless
- most people accept all kinds of statements as meaningful not just scientific or analytic statements
what is falsification principle
language is meaningful that can prove against it
who applied it
Antony Flew
what did he conclude
give an example
and his key quote
religious statements are meaningless as believers won’t allow anything to count against it
God is good
die the death by a thousand qualifications
how is John wisdoms parable applied to falsification.
parable of gardener - 2 people presented with same evidence - person who believers there is a Gardner will not allow evidence to count against it
how does the falsification principle differ from verification
- depends on falsification to decide if statement is meaningful
what is problem with falsification principle
people won’t allow anything to count against it.
what are challenges of falsification
flew is wrong - some give up faith due to evil and suffering
2. some say statements should not be cognitive - principle is rejected
Richard Swinburne Toy Cupboard
toys come out at night move nobody watching
can’t falsify no way collecting evidence still understand toys doing this so meaningful
Mitchells parable of stinger
stranger tells fighter working undercover fighter never believes stranger despite conflicting evidence, fighter won’t falsify his beliefs
how did anyone flew change his mind
- converted to theism
if he is a theist he must believe language is meaningful undermine earlier position
Inherent Problem
all language formed by our experiences
as God is described as being outside of our time hard to know if we can describe him
finite language can’t describe an infinite God. Can’t experience in empirical terms
many conclude if there is God can’t know it can’t speak meaningfully
Twentieth century thinking about religious language
- New emphasis on empiricism
- Wittgenstein - language only meaningful if it relates to scientific fact and empirical reality.
strengths to logical positivism -2
- Some agree with flew - when religious believers never give up there claims
- some religious events defy logic - resurrection, virgin birth
logical positivists say that events have to pass certain tests before considered meaningful. these two events fail so meaningless
weakness of logical positivism
- principle fail own tests
- some religious statements are historical, Jesus preformed miracles
- analogy, symbol and language yes successful and deafest challenge
who created symbol
Paul tillich - 20 th century
what is a sign
precise, specific, recongnised, Clear in communicating what stand for
what is a symbol
representative of something else, meaningful
point to a reality beyond them - self transcending, speak to believers
