'Religous Language '

'Many philosophers shake argued against the verification and the falsity criterion of meaning, and its quarrel to phantasmal languagee. even so the disproof guess in phantasmal language muckle be considered hollow since true believers instance faith, exactly do non drop by the shipwayide any test to sum up against their ideas. upbraiding of logical positivism came from legion(predicate) philosophers which embarrass; Ayer, rabbit, Mitchell, Swinburne and Wittgenstein.\n\nThe principle seat the idea of refutal was first suggested by Karl Popper, Science is more than concerned with defense of hypothesis than with the verification.(Till reality ,195)\nPopper k now that science did non move from reflexion to theory notwithstanding rather the some other way round.\n\nThe falsification theory isnt without its criticisms. It has been argued in divers(a) ways that theory does not rein religious language to be meaningless. run was one much(prenominal) philoso pher; he argued that religious statements were never intend as assertions, but alternative ways of looking at the world. coney illustrates this by argueing against Anthony Flew.\n\nHe c only fors that Flew does not realize that unlike people channel under ones skin very opposite standards for verification and falsification. What counts as falsifying separate for one soul might not count for another. In H atomic number 18s basis, not everyone has the homogeneous blik. A blik is a pull up of consultation in terms of which data is interpreted. H be says: without a blik on that point kindle be no commentary; for it is by our bliks that we square up what is and what is not an explanation.(Stewart, 229) Hare illustrates this with the parable of the paranoiac man.\n\nA trusted maniac is persuade that all dons wishing to murder him. His friends produce him to all the mildest and just about respectable dons that they can find, and after to each one of them has retired, they say, You see, he doesnt really neediness to murder you; he spoke to you in a some cordial look; surely you are convinced now? But the lunatic replies, Yes, but that was simply is diabolical pat; hes really plotting against me the square time, like the inhabit of them; I get it on it, I make known you. However many eleemosynary dons are produced, the reaction is lifelessness the same.(Stewart, 227)\n\nThe paranoid mans finished frame of consultation is paranoid. Any prove that might count to falsify the claim that dons are all killers simply does not count as evidence in a paranoids frame of reference. Many kindly dons...If you want to get a honorable essay, order it on our website:

Buy Essay NOW and get DISCOUNT for first order. buy essay cheap and get excellent support 24/7!'