Summary

Summary Religious Language A Level RS Notes

0 purchase

Module
Unit 4 - Religious language

Institution
PEARSON (PEARSON)

Detailed notes on section 4 of the Pearson Edexcel A Level RS Specification (Paper 1 - Philosophy) Includes: Aquinas and analogy (Predicative; Proportional) Paul Tillich on Symbolism Rudolf Otto on numinosity Logical Positivism Ayer's Verification Principle Flew's Falsification Principle ...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 8 pages

View example

Uploaded on September 27, 2023
Number of pages 8
Written in 2022/2023
Type Summary

religious studies
a level
religious language
st thomas aquinas
analogy
predicative analogy
equivocal vs univocal
richard swinburne
paul tillich
logical positivism
verification principle
ant
falsifi
rs

4. Religious Language - Is meaningful talk about God possible?

“It is only possible to talk about Religion meaningfully through analogy and symbol?”
“How can we speak of God using terms derived from our ordinary language?”
“Are the terms used to describe God to be taken in the same sense as in their other uses?

For instance, what does ‘love’ mean in terms of God, if it differs from human love?
- 4 types of love: Eros (romantic), Philos (friendship), Storge (familial), Agape
(unconditional)
- Does God love us univocally (literally true)? Or equivocally (obscure meaning)? Or
is human language applied to God wholly useless?

- Univocal use of a term involves a convergence of the modus significandi (the mode
of signification) and res significata (the thing signified); e.g., the grass is green - the
house is green - "greenness" predicated in two different things in the same sense.
- Equivocal: divergence of the modus significandi and the res significata; e.g., John is
boiling - the water is boiling. Here what is signified by "boiling" in the two sentences
is different as is the mode in which it is true of each subject.
- Analogical use of a term involves a convergence of the modus significandi and a
convergence of the res significata; i.e., God is good - John is good. Here the same
thing - "goodness" - holds true of two subjects, though the manner in which it is true
of each is different. Equally, faithfulness. "The dog is faithful to his master" / "the
man is faithful to his wife". Faithfulness in each case is exemplified in different ways
- faithfulness will be exhibited in different ways depending on agent of faithfulness

If God is transcendent (ineffable), language must be equivocal and cannot be comprehended
through human language (however, if God is beyond description, meaning is again lost)
- Central contention of Aquinas’ doctrine of analogia is that the meanings of perfection
terms as applied to God and to creatures are neither purely “univocal” (i.e., identical
in meaning), nor purely “equivocal” (completely distinct in meaning), but
“analogical” (distinct, but related in meaning).

Equivocal view of religious language similar to “via negativa” (way of negation) - God can
only defined negatively i.e. by what God is not; consequence of the via negationis is that talk
about God is not univocal

The Way of Eminence (via eminentiae): there is a knowledge of God derived from
predicating the creature's perfections of God in the most perfection and supreme fashion.

, Aquinas and analogy
since God created the universe, there must be a link between human attributes or predicates
(loving, powerful, etc.) and God’s (all-loving, all-powerful): the attributes are being used as
analogies
- Analogy of Attribution (Predicative Analogy)
“The baker is good” ; “The baker’s bread is good” - same quality attributed to different
things: “good” in terms of bread suggests meaning for baker’s “good”
If we know what constitutes “good” in the case of human beings, we can understand
something of what “good” means in relation to the creator of human beings, God.
(however the latter have no title to the common analogous name save through attribution to
the prime analogate.)

- Analogy of Proportion
“I know that a dog can love, though the love is inferior to supreme human love”
Allows for “downwards” analogy despite incomplete knowledge of canine love - equally,
logically allows for “upwards analogy”
- Analogates receive the common name only by extrinsic reference or denomination
This kind of analogical predication, is in effect when the selfsame word is said of different
things according to a notion that is univocally the same as regards the primary analogate but
proportionally varied in respect to the relations wherein the other analogates stand to it.

Is analogy valuable for describing God?

- Allows for respectful acknowledgment of God's - Analogy of attribution can equally be used to
transcendence while attempting to prove God is bad
understand/express aspects of the divine nature. - Counters with Augustine’s view of evil
- Preserves difference between God & Creations
- Language used to describe God must be part
- Provides bridge between human experience and
something beyond our direct comprehension. univocal part cognitive: must be univocal
- Acknowledges no single analogy can capture the commonality between human & divine goodness,
entirety of God's nature - multiple analogies can as equivocity in both scenarios, may render the
be used to approach aspects of the divine, possession of shared traits meaningless
fostering diverse theological discourse. - Relies on acceptance of God as creator (made “in
- Sheer conceptual equivocity is avoided by the the image and likeness of God”)
fact that various meanings all have some mutual - Predication of certain attributes to God
connotation through being referred to through presupposes foundation of knowledge in God’s
the single entity of the commonly-named nature (Aquinas argues Creator is source of
predicate. perfections of creatures; which can be known
through reason.)
- Analogies bear no resemblance to original
common analogous names save through their
attribution to the prime analogate.
- Condemned by Barth as ‘the invention of
Antichrist’ in assuming a ‘bond of being’

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller sunn1es. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £7.39. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

68175 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now

Start selling