Zusammenfassung der Ressource
A2 PHILOSOPHY: RELIGIOUS
LANGUAGE: SYMBOL, MYTH, ANALOGY
- ANALOGY
- AQUINAS:
- suggests that language about God
should be understood as
analogical, as an alternative to
understanding language univocally
and equivocally
- rejected the via negativa
- rejected
univocal:
attributes of
God are part
of his
necessary
essence
- rejected equivocal: would
never learn anything about
God this way
- God is infinite, how
can the finite grasp
the infinite
- ANALOGY provides a middle way, there are 2
types of analogy:
- ANALOGY OF
ATTRIBUTION
- establishes a
casual
relationship,
can call God
good, he is
the cause of
all good
- ANALOGY OF PROPORTION
- qualified
by the
nature of
what it is
being
applied
too
- he thought it was
possible to speak of
God positively in
non-literal and
analogical terms
- RAMSEY
- used analogy to argue that it is possible to speak meaningfully about God
- God can be used as a model
- insight/disclosure into
the qualities of God
- STRENGTHS
- given the
infinite
nature of
God and the
finite
nature of
humans,
analogy
provides an
appropriate
way to
speak about
God which
is neither
empty nor
to be taken
literally
- gets past the problems of
univocal and equivocal
langauge
- avoids anthropomorphism
- WEAKNESSES
- must be
assumed that
language applies
equivocally for
analogy to work
- SWINBURNE: questioned what is wrong with univocal
language: can legitimately speak of God's existence and
of our own
- assumes qualities of God
- MYTH: stories conveying meanings
and truths. They point to realities
which cannot be expressed in other
ways
- HICK: "not literally true, does not literally apply,
invites a particular attitude in its hearers"
- VATTIMO: we have our own myths which shape our world
- MACINTYRE: cant split myths from
reality, from a religious perspective,
they are meaningful narratives which
express basic human concerns about
existence, they have the ability to
communicate fundamental truths
- KAREN ARMSTRONG: "big bang is mythical language for scientists"
- Do they convey liberal truths? Truth
about the nature of human existence,
could equally be expressed once
narratives have been demythologised
- STRENGTHS
- ways of conveying religious beliefs
easily to younger generations (memorable)
- makes via
negativa
unnecessary
- communicates universal themes
- can be
applied to all
cultures
relevantly
- WEAKNESSES
- did scholars intend their narratives to be myths?
- devalues meaning
- no external criteria allowing us to judge
- stories were once viewed as truths, it is
only now that they are regarded as myths
- SYMBOLS
- evoke an understanding of God
- BULTMANN: teachings in the Bible, apocalyptic
language of the NT lies in early Church teachings
in mythical forms
- TILLICH: open up new levels of reality. They are
different to signs, and make it possible to say
something meaningful about God. Not to be
understood as saying something literal about
God. God is not just one thing,.
- symbols have meaning beyond themselves,
they are important in evoking meaning
- REALISTS
believe
thereto be
something
ultimately real
which all our
symbols of or
about God
refer to
- HICK: religious people use their own culturally bound symbols.
- symbols of "love" and "being"
participate in the divine reality
without actually being the
divine reality.
- inner
connection
means the
symbol chosen
is never
arbitrary
- STRENGTHS
- provides a way to talk about God
- symbols are potent for what they stand for
- universal resonance as conveyers of meaning
- avoid anthropomorphism
- metaphoric
- WEAKNESSES
- come on to take a literal meaning
- DAWKINS: leads to
the conclusion
there is no real
truth
- TILLICH fails to
explain what it
means to say that
things participate
in what they
symbolise
- ambiguous
- possess no literal meaning