• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Mythological language raises very difficult if not impossible problems. Discuss this statement by examining both verification and falsification.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Mythological language raises very difficult if not impossible problems." Discuss this statement by examining both verification and falsification. "A myth is a symbolic approximate expression of truth, which the human mind cannot perceive sharply and completely, but can only glimpse vaguely, and therefore cannot adequately or accurately express." - Millar Burrows. In the context of religion, myths can be taken to mean stories about God which have vital meanings for an individual, a community, a nation or the cosmos. Myths embody and express claims which cannot be expressed in any other way. Myth is the most complex type of symbolic language because it uses symbols, metaphors and imagery. They use them to explain the unexplainable and to give insights into human existence. Mythology does not convey information that isn't true. They convey concepts that go way beyond the true/false descriptors. They express stories that are "other worldly". They allow humans to gain insight into two very important questions; the cosmological question about the meaning of life and the existential question about emotions, feelings, believing etc. ...read more.

Middle

"the world is a few thousand years old," could just simply be saying God made it. So referring to the statement, "mythological language raises very difficult if not impossible problems" It is clear that even more than symbols, myths seem outdated. In the 19th century, D.F. Strauss suggested that we need to shift the focus of myth from "the story of a miraculous occurrence, to the story of a miraculous occurrence." This basically means in the first case, it is assumed that an objective true narrative about a miracle is being expressed, in the second, that an embodied religious truth is being conveyed in a story form and isn't necessarily true. Another critic of the use of mythological language was Rudolph Bultmann who said that we must not take myths literally. The Bible should be seen as a myth and only by reading the Bible as mythological text can we fully understand it. The Bible was written in a pre-scientific age when mythological language had a lot of meaning, i.e. ...read more.

Conclusion

He could also have added that this was put together during the course of many centuries. Significantly the difference between Bultmann and Dawkins is that Bultmann still maintained that there was truth to be extracted from the mythological narrative once the myth was stripped away. However, those who are in support of myth, claim that, since religious language is anti-realist, it is not concerned with making true or false statements. J.W. Rogerson wrote: "Because myths have their birth not in logic but in intuitions of transcendence, they are of value to traditions that seek to describe the action of the other worldly in the present world." So in conclusion, it is important to understand how myths should be interpreted rather than being concerned to establish what the facts of the matter actually are. We have to remember how these stories were heard, i.e. in the context of simple people. This was a language they could understand and images and pictures that related to ordinary readers and listeners to religious works. This allowed the underlying meanings to be absorbed without needing a great education. ?? ?? ?? ?? Natalie Limbrey 13D ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Religious language is meaningless, Discuss

    Therefore the statements are meaningful as we know how to falsify them. Basil Mitchell wanted to show how religious statements are meaningful even if they are not straight forward to verify or falsify.

  2. Religious language is meaningless. Discuss.

    Hare also went on to say that looking at the world in this way is seen as a "blik." Religious beliefs are bliks because of the impact they have on every individual's life and the way believers look at their lives that is different to somebody else's.

  1. The verification principle offers no real challenge to religious belief. Discuss

    however black holes cannot be observed; instead scientists demonstrated their existence by looking at other evidence which suggested the existence of the black hole Although there is still a major problem that Verificationism is unverifiable. Many philosophers have pointed out that claiming 'statements are only meaningful if verifiable by sense-observation' is itself unverifiable.

  2. An embodied life in heaven is entirely possible. Discuss.

    Dualism (philosophical understanding of the term) originates from the seventeenth century French philosopher Rene Descartes. Descartes, who quoted utterance "I think, therefore I am2", popularised the idea of reality as a separation of matter (extended or spatial substance) and spirit (thinking substance, including God). This form of mind-body dualism became known as "Cartesian Dualism", after the Latin pronunciation of Descartes (Cartes).

  1. In what ways may suffering create philosophical problems for religious believers? Outline two solutions ...

    In addition, Augustine says that evil has resulted from the abuse of human free will has also been supported by modern thinkers. It seems clear that humans choosing to act in the wrong ways cause much of the evil and suffering in the world.

  2. "Religious Language is meaningless." Discuss.

    The believer will always believe (despite any empirical evidence against it or for it). A number or philosophers and theologians attempted to show that Flew's attack on religious language was not conclusive. The main argument being that the language of religion, although not verified by experience, is not falsified by experience either.

  1. Ethical language is meaningless. Discuss.

    He called this a ?simple notion? and explained it by saying it is rather like trying to define the colour yellow. We cannot define what the colour yellow is but we can show someone an example. H.A. Prichard also believes in intuitionism.

  2. Reductive physicalist accounts of the mind fail to fully explain the nature of mental ...

    However, Behaviourists have no legitimate response to the problem of Qualia. They may try and discredit it as not a real concept, but this is inadequate as the qualitative feeling of, say, seeing and experiencing red feels very real to us.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work