• 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...


"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.


"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language raises very difficult if not impossible problems" It is clear that even more than symbols, myths seem outdated.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.


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.

    The same argument as in Flew's parable occurs, however, Wisdom's parable is closer to illustrating religious beliefs and language. It shows that there is realistic evidence of a possible gardener as there or orderly plants. Richmond points out in his book "Theology and Metaphysics" that Wisdom's parable concludes that religion

  2. Religious language is meaningless. Discuss.

    M. Hare stated falsification can be used for cognitive statements but it cannot be used for non cognitive statements because religious language cannot be falsified but it doesn't mean it has no meaning. He used the example of the student.

  1. Religious language is meaningless, Discuss

    cannot falsify but we have the ability to understand the meaning behind the statement. He used the example of the toy in the cupboard. He said we can never prove that the toys come out of the cupboard at night and move around when we are not watching them.

  2. Science Solves All The Problems About Where We Come From Discuss

    deal of time for evolution to take place and transform single-celled amoeba into fully functional human beings. Dawkins also states that although fossils are a very persuasive method of proving that evolution happened, it's not as important as other findings.

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

    This means that to use free will efficiently, evil and suffering has to exist and be created by God, or else it would mean that all our choices in life would be pre-determined However, the difference between humans being in the 'image' of God and being in his 'likeness' is

  2. 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.

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

    From this view point intentionality is not an issue, since the invoking of many different mental states to produce one notable behaviour is of no consequence: neuron 273, 296 and 783 together, say, caused the given action. The attempted example used to discredit the Identity Theory is the notion that Reductive Physicalists cannot explain the qualitative feeling of things.

  2. Philosophers have proved conclusively that religious language is meaningful. Discuss

    Paul Tillich was a theologian who believed that it is possible to speak meaningfully about religious language and came up with the theory that religious language, because it is symbolic in nature, has a profound effect upon humans. Tillich starts by making a distinction between signs and symbols.

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