Ayer paragraph 1 helpful hints for answering
question
a) Clarify
/ examine the argument and / or interpretation in the passage. [30]
First summarise in your own words what the
overall message of the passage is e.g.
In paragraph one Ayer is suggesting that philosophers generally agree
that the existence of a transcendent God, the god of Classical Theism, cannot
be ‘demonstratively proved’ and that therefore any statements about this kind of God possess no
‘literal significance.’ [obviously there is more that can be said even in this
summary.]
Do drop in the odd direct quote from the passage
see ‘….‘
Then explain any concepts which need explaining to a non-specialist
e.g.
Transcendent
Classical theism
Arguments from the regularity of nature
(teleological arguments) HP
Owen notes ‘…the sense of God’s reality can be produced by the contemplation of
beauty and order in nature.’ Isaac Newton agreed and so have plenty of
scientists down the ages been convinced of the existence of God from the
evidence in nature…
God is a metaphysical term…
Etc
Use quotes.
Also explain his claims e.g.
- Philosophers generally admit…
- No way of proving
- Not even probable
- Cannot be true or false
- Religious language is meaningless…who says…Wittgenstein Religious
Language Games
- No literal significance
- Bertrand Russell ‘deception is constantly practised with
success.’ (pinched from Donovan!)
Quote
Then put or explain that there may be other viewpoints e.g.
Not all philosophers…what about theists and other
religious people? E.g.s of religious philosophers and modern religious thinkers
like John Polkinghorne, John Hick, Richard Swinburne, FC Copleston… just
because Dawkins is such a popular and frequent contributor to media debates
about these issues doesn’t make his view the only one!
Some would argue that God’s existence is
an empirical hypothesis… e.g those who have had religious experiences such as St Teresa of Avila who said
‘…it is wholly impossible
for me to doubt that I have been in God and God in me.’ For her it was a
wholly empirical experience if not verifiable…
Cumulative weight of evidence of arguments for
God’s existence… Swinburne…
Lots of assertions are made which cannot be
empirically verified ‘I love John’ ‘he loves me’ ‘that is an ugly piece of
art.’ Doesn’t mean they are necessarily meaningless.
Meaningless to whom?
Quote.
You can also begin by putting his opinion in a context e.g
Ayer was one of the Logical positivists, Vienna
Circle, 1920s -30’s; they believed… verification…
types of language…
b) Do
you agree with the ideas expressed? Justify your point of view and discuss its
implications for understanding religious and human experience. [20]
In my opinion… talk about the existence
of God is meaningful. Not just for the believer but also for the non-believer.
Religion is a world wide phenomenon it would be short-sighted to ignore the
fact that many people are affected, live their lives by and meaningfully
practice a religion.
For example….
Gandhi…mother Teresa…Martin Luther King (plus possibly some Biblical or other
religious examples)
I take the point that perhaps we can come to no universally agreed upon conclusions as
to the exact nature of what ever God we might be investigating but it cannot be
pointless to try. Swinburne called God ‘transcategorical’… but as humans we
live and grow by learning more about our environment and the world which we
inhabit.
I agree that religion
has had as many detrimental effects as positive ones e.g…. list a few of each…
people / events / art / literature etc
However any phenomena
which has had such an effect and impact on society must be subject to
investigation and to do that we must talk about it…
Do fling in
the philosophers names particularly Swinburne, Russell, Dawkins and some of the
more important experients e.g St Teresa etc
Find some good
quotes that will do for all uses and learn them.
No comments:
Post a Comment