Wellington College is a school in Berkshire. So, Aquinas argues, we cannot speak of God univocally. Published by Joanna Lyons Modified over 3 years ago. The nature of God is transcendent and a mystery. Might Swinburne have something to say in defence of mystics, against Ayer? The religious have always claimed that the divine is difficult to express in terms of limited human language.

This raises logical positivism and the verification principle. He has abilities beyond our observation super-empirical attributes. Download ppt “Religious Language. What God is, is defined by the language game of faith. Why might some theists claim that mysticism is cognitive?

He then went on to say that problems in philosophy may occur through misunderstanding evidenlty words can be used in different language games. Key terms you must consider: Neither do experiences of morals show that there is such a thing as moral knowledge i.

`God-talk is evidently nonsense` – A

Richard Swinburne argues that there are propositions which no-one knows how to verify but still are not meaningless. The student may say that this teacher is so clever that he would never leave any evidence of any kind. The debate is ages old. Essentially, we are now looking at attempts to say that religious language can be used meaningfully, only tallk in a direct or simplistically descriptive sense. So, he was less concerned with the truth or nonseense of language contrast the Logical Positivists.

Religious Language.

However, Ayer touches on some secondary points: What about events such as Our Lady of Fatima links to A2 religious experienceaeyr thousands of witnesses claimed to have seen the same peculiar solar activity? It links his criticism of religious truth claims in the first three paragraphs to the rest of his discussion of theism. So, Aquinas argues, we cannot speak of God univocally. Is it impossible for God to be fully known defined through empirical manifestations?


A metaphysical utterance cannot be true or false.

Thomas Aquinas AD Italian priest, philosopher. Have theists regarded God as empirically verifiable? He also objects that there is no way to distinguish between sane or insane bliks, and the judgement that religion is insane could only ever nonaense arbitrary.

aj ayer god talk is evidently nonsense essay

The health of the animal is present in its urine; we can tell that the bull is healthy by studying this. Are there any decent takl to what Ayer is saying?

This links our A2 topics of religious experience and religious language together. Wittgenstein argued that words have no objective reference points; they simply reflect systems of behaviour.

The nature of God is transcendent and a mystery. The link between language and science.

Do such beliefs have to be empirically verifiable? This connects with the A2 topic of religious language. He will then give further consideration to the claims of mystics in the next paragraph. What are the implications of seeing God as indefinite, un-provable?

Secondary Points Ayer does not get involved in the discussion of the causes of religious feelings, but he alludes to the fact that this debate is happening see above.


Why should believers be allowed to say that the game of religious language requires no justification?

A.J Ayers ‘God- talk is evidently nonsense’ Essay – Document in A Level and IB Religious Studies

So too for religious symbols — if we are to open up their meaning then they cannot be substituted for anything else. You can add this document to your saved list Sign in Available only to authorized users. Plain English Paraphrase If God is made equivalent to natural objects, then this language might mean something. Are there rvidently problems associated with this view?

aj ayer god talk is evidently nonsense essay

In Language, Truth and Logiche demonstrated what he saw as the linguistic faults of religion. Ayer allows that this kind of nature worship might mean something but points out that modern believers have tried to gpd beyond it.

By finding appropriate analogical language, Aquinas thought we could say broadly what God is like. He does not say that they are just false; it is more that they cannot really tell us anything at all.

Author: admin